THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 

GIFT  OF 

William  Popper 


HISTOKY,    PKOPHECY 


AND 


HISTORY,    PROPHECY 


AND 


THE    MONUMENTS 


BY 


JAMES   FREDERICK   McCURDY,  PH.D.,  LL.D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  ORIENTAL   LANGUAGES  IN 
UNIVERSITY   COLLEGE,   TORONTO 


VOLUME    I 

TO  THE   DOWNFALL  OF  SAMARIA 


Itfeirr  gorft 
THE  MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

LONDON:  MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  LTD. 
1896 

All  rights  reserved 


COPYRIGHT,  1894, 
BY  MACMILLAX  AND  CO. 


Set  up  and  electrotyped  July,  1894.      Reprinted  March, 
1895;  July,  1896. 


NottoooD 

J.  S.  Gushing  &  Co.  — Berwick  &  Smith. 
Norwood,  Mass.,  U.S.A. 


OS 


DEDICATED 

TO 
MY    MOTHER 

IN 
GRATITUDE  AND    REVERENCE 


894764 


PREFACE 


THE  work,  of  which  the  first  volume  is  herewith  given  to 
the  public,  has  been  undertaken  primarily  in  the  interest  of 
the  study  of  the  Old  Testament.  Its  aim  is  to  help  those  into 
whose  hands  it  may  fall  to  apprehend  in  its  true  relations  the 
history  of  that  ancient  people  through  whom  the  world  has 
gained  most  of  its  heritage  of  moral  and  spiritual  light  and 
power.  It  is  a  conviction  of  the  writer  that  the  vagueness 
and  incertitude,  and  consequent  indifference,  with  which  the 
history  and  literature  of  Israel  are  regarded  by  the  mass  of 
intelligent  people,  are  in  great  part  due  to  the  one-sidedness 
and  false  perspective  of  the  picture  which  for  one  reason  or 
another  they  have  drawn  for  themselves.  It  is  certain,  at 
least,  that  the  Hebrews  have  been  gravely  misapprehended 
because  their  vast  political,  social,  moral,  and  religious  envi- 
ronment has  been  so  much  ignored.  They  have  been  practi- 
cally made  a  measure  for  themselves  in  all  that  concerns 
national  characteristics,  in  all  that  has  to  do  with  culture  and 
material  power  and  the  elements  of  civic  life.  Their  place  in 
time  and  order  of  development  among  the  kindred  peoples 
has  been  equally  misconceived.  In  the  attempt  to  account  for 
their  phenomenal  history,  full  play  has  rightly  been  given  to 
wonder  and  admiration,  while  little  attention  has  been  paid  to 
their  antecedents,  their  racial  affinities,  and  those  vital  inter- 
relations with  the  contemporary  peoples  which  necessarily  de- 
termined their  destiny.  They  become  more  real,  more  human, 
more  interesting,  and  therefore  morally  more  helpful  to  us,  the 
more  we  regard  them  in  the  light  of  their  historical  attributes 
and  achievements,  as  the  children  of  their  own  ancestry  and 


vi  PREFACE 

their  own  times.  The  first  essentials  of  this  clearness  and 
fulness  of  conception  are  an  acquaintance  with  that  whole 
region  of  Western  Asia  whose  physical  features  so  largely 
conditioned  the  fortunes  of  the  Hebrews.  With  this  must  be 
united  a  knowledge  of  those  peoples  with  whom  they  were 
ethnically  associated,  and  whose  political  and  social  character- 
istics they  shared,  as  well  as  of  the  national  movements  in 
which  they  voluntarily  or  involuntarily  took  part,  and  by 
which  they  were  made  and  unmade  as  a  nation.  To  study  the 
history  of  the  Hebrews  in  its  right  relations  and  due  propor- 
tions is  not  to  depreciate  their  unique  divine  vocation ;  it  is 
rather  to  exalt  it  by  making  it  more  intelligible  and  reasonable, 
by  bringing  it  better  within  the  range  of  our  vision  and  nearer 
to  our  sympathies. 

Next  to  the  Biblical  interest  of  the  story,  and  in  reality  as 
a  part  of  it  according  to  the  true  Biblical  conception,  comes 
the  importance  of  the  subject  for  general  history.  That  the 
Northern  Semites  gave  the  world  its  most  influential  religion 
and  also  the  beginnings  of  its  practical  science,  as  well  as  the 
first  successful  examples  of  imperial  government,  are  facts  not 
seriously  gainsaid.  It  might  therefore  be  reasonably  supposed 
that  the  genius  and  the  vicissitudes  of  the  race  and  the  peoples 
which  rendered  these  services  to  humanity  would  be  not  merely 
the  theme  of  learned  exposition,  but  a  recognized  essential  of  a 
liberal  education.  The  remoteness  of  many  of  the  events  and 
of  their  scenes  from  our  modern  and  Western  associations 
should  be  only  an  additional  motive  to  interest  and  inquiry, 
on  the  ground  of  the  admitted  and  much  lamented  narrowness 
and  one-sided  positiveness  of  our  modern  culture.  Moreover, 
at  least  the  outlines  of  an  intelligible  history  of  the  ancient 
Semites  during  most  of  their  activity  upon  the  world's  arena 
may  already  be  drawn ;  and  the  recovery  of  the  materials  for 
closing  the  gaps  that  still  exist  in  the  record  is  the  most  fasci- 
nating and  successful  pursuit  in  which  scholars  in  any  province 
of  historical  research  are  at  present  engaged.  The  discoveries 
that  are  going  on  in  these  very  years  are  bringing  before  us 
the  real  "  youth-time  of  the  world,"  as  it  was  lived  through  in 
days  antedating  the  days  of  Homer  by  as  long  an  interval  as 
that  which  separates  us  from  the  oldest  monuments  of  Greece. 


PREFACE  vii 

They  are  showing  that  historical  science  also  has  new  worlds 
to  reveal ;  and  its  newest  world  is  what  we  call  the  old. 

For  the  general  neglect  of  these  matters  the  representatives 
of  genuine  Semitic  scholarship  are  perhaps  in  some  degree 
responsible.  The  field  is  large  and  not  everywhere  thoroughly 
worked;  and  the  actual  permanent  results  of  long-continued 
labour  are  not  made  generally  known,  because  specialists  as  a 
rule  do  not  take  time  to  popularize  their  subjects.  Yet  it  is 
evident  that  only  by  specialists  can  such  a  business  be  prop- 
erly done.  It  is  unnecessary  to  particularize  the  various 
classes  of  writers  to  whom  the  work  of  popular  instruction 
has  been  left.  It  is  sufficient  to  say  that  while  competent 
authorities  have  influenced  greatly  the  accessible  literature  of 
Oriental  history  and  civilization,  their  contributions  have  been 
brought  before  the  general  public  for  the  most  part  indirectly, 
and  in  such  a  fashion  that  it  is  difficult  for  the  ordinary  reader 
to  distinguish  the  important  from  the  unimportant,  and  con- 
jecture or  hypothesis  from  ascertained  fact.  Moreover,  there 
has  been  little  effort  made  in  any  quarter  to  bring  into  organic 
connection  the  historical  knowledge  of  the  ancient  past  that 
has  been  gained  in  recent  times. 

The  present  work  seeks  to  tell  as  simply  as  possible  the 
story  of  the  ancient  Semitic  peoples,  including  as  the  dominat- 
ing theme  the  fortunes  of  Israel.  If  the  recital  turns  out 
to  be  virtually  a  history  of  a  well-defined  portion  of  Western 
Asia  in  the  olden  times,  the  circumstance  will,  I  trust,  be  found 
to  be  more  than  a  coincidence.  The  treatment  of  the  subject 
has  been  thrown  into  a  form  convenient  for  ready  use,  and  the 
whole  arranged  as  a  manual  suitable  for  classes  in  colleges, 
as  well  as  for  private  students.  In  all  matters,  except  those 
connected  with  Egyptian  history,  I  have  drawn  directly  from 
original  sources;  and  the  lack  of  extended  narration  and  dis- 
cussion in  that  region  will  not,  I  hope,  be  accounted  a  serious 
defect,  when  it  appears  how  insignificant  was  the  influence  of 
the  Egyptians  upon  Israel  in  any  matter  of  vital  moment,  and 
how  infrequently  the  two  nations  came  nearer  to  each  other 
than  just  within  speaking  distance.  On  the  other  hand,  a  space 
relatively  large  has  been  given  to  the  history  of  Babylonia,  on 
account  of  its  influence  upon  the  fortunes  of  the  Western  lands, 


viii  PREFACE 

including  finally  the  destiny  of  Israel.  It  is  gratifying  to  find 
that  the  positions  which  I  have  maintained  as  to  the  extent 
and  character  of  the  earliest  Semitic  empire  of  North  Baby- 
lonia, are  supported  by  the  conclusions  of  Hilprecht  in  Part  I 
of  his  work  on  Old  Babylonian  Inscriptions.  This  epoch-mak- 
ing volume  appeared  after  the  principal  portion  of  the  present 
work  was  written ;  but  I  have  been  able  to  use  its  new  and 
striking  facts  in  connection  with  the  interesting  and  important 
question  of  the  range  of  Semitic  government  and  civilization 
in  the  more  immediate  neighbourhood  of  the  central  district. 

As  a  rule  no  allusion  has  been  made  in  the  text  to  sources 
of  information  for  facts  known  to  educated  people  generally,  or 
for  opinions  that  require  no  special  demonstration.  Otherwise 
I  have  aimed  to  give  full  and  explicit  references. 

The  second  and  concluding  volume  will  embrace  Book  VII, 
"Hebrews,  Egyptians,  and  Assyrians,"  Book  VIII,  "Hebrews 
and  Chaldseans,"  Book  IX,  "  Hebrews  and  Persians."  It  will, 
I  trust,  not  be  long  delayed.  I  shall  be  grateful  to  reviewers 
who  shall  point  out  any  of  the  inevitable  errors  and  defects 
of  the  work.  Even  anonymous  strictures  will  be  welcomed  if 
they  do  not  consist  wholly  of  personalities  or  generalities. 

J.  F.  McCUBDY. 

UNIVERSITY  COLLEGE,  TORONTO, 
June  21,  1894. 


PREFACE   TO   THE   SECOND   EDITION 


THE  first  edition  of  this  work  having  been  exhausted  at  such 
an  unexpectedly  early  date,  I  have  had  no  opportunity  to  make 
any  serious  revision  of  the  contents,  and  therefore  confine  my- 
self for  the  present  to  the  few  verbal  corrections  that  have 
been  found  necessary.  For  these  I  am  chiefly  indebted  to  a 
careful  review  of  the  volume  in  the  Boston  Commonwealth. 

A  word  of  remark  seems  called  for,  in  addition  to  what  was 
said  in  the  preface  to  the  first  edition,  with  regard  to  the  place 
given  in  the  work  to  the  subject  of  Egyptian  history.  The 
statement  there  made  has  been  somewhat  misunderstood.  It  is 
not  my  purpose  to  ignore  this  subject,  which  is  in  fact  pre- 
sented in  the  book  in  large  outlines  wherever  it  has  any  bearing 
upon  the  fortunes  of  Western  Asia.  Much  less  are  the  points 
of  historical  contact  between  Egypt  and  Palestine  left  out  of 
view,  since  these  are  made  an  essential  feature  of  the  whole 
treatment.  I  intended  merely  to  say  that  the  affairs  of  Egypt 
generally,  as  compared  with  those  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria, 
are  of  greatly  subordinate  interest  and  importance  for  the  main 
motive  of  setting  forth  the  parts  played  respectively  by  the 
nations  in  the  making  and  unmaking  of  Israel. 

I  can  here  only  express  my  gratification  at  the  very  flatter- 
ing reception  which  the  book  has  met  with  both  from  the  press 
and  from  the  public  at  large.  It  is  encouraging  to  find  that 
an  attempt  to  furnish  an  historical  introduction  to  the  Old 
Testament,  laid  upon  the  broadest  lines  and  presented  in  a 
strictly  scientific  and  yet  popular  form,  is  so  warmly  appreci- 
ated by  Bible  students  and  educated  people  generally. 

J.  F.  McCURDY. 
UNIVERSITY  COLLEGE,  TORONTO, 
December  29,  1894. 


CONTENTS   OF  VOL.   I 
BOOK  I 

THE  NORTHERN  SEMITES 

CHAPTER  I 
THE  SEMITES  IN  HISTORY.     §  1-16.     P.  1-17 

§  1.  Significance  of  the  study  of  History  —  §  2.  Purpose  and  Provi- 
dence in  history  —  §  3.  No  distinction  between  "sacred"  and  "secular" 
history  —  §  4.  The  historian's  task  with  reference  to  the  races  of  man- 
kind who  have  made  the  world's  history  —  §  5.  Contributions  of  the 
Aryan  and  Semitic  races  respectively  to  the  world's  progress  —  §  6.  Special 
services  of  the  Semites  and  their  limitations  —  §  7.  Religious  ideas,  pre- 
eminently the  gift  of  the  Semites,  perpetuated  by  the  western  Aryans  — 
§  8.  Potency  and  vitality  of  these  Semitic  conceptions  —  §  9.  Distinction 
to  be  accorded  to  the  ancient  Semites ;  among  these  to  the  Northern 
Semites,  and  among  these  to  the  Hebrews  —  §  10.  Impossibility  of  treat- 
ing the  history  of  Israel  by  itself  alone  adequately  or  justly  —  §11.  Occa- 
sions of  partial  and  one-sided  histories  of  the  Hebrews  —  §  12.  Immediate 
sources  for  a  history  of  the  Northern  Semites  are  meagre  and  imperfect  — 
§  13.  For  the  most  important  periods  these  are  supplemented  by  Hebrew 
Prophecy  ;  its  genius  and  scope  —  §  14.  Prophecy  superior  to  the  political 
chronicles  of  the  Northern  Semites  for  higher  historical  purposes  — 
§  15.  Scdpe  and  general  plan  of  the  present  inquiry  —  §  16.  Right  spirit 
and  attitude  of  the  inquirer,  and  the  method  to  be  pursued 

CHAPTER   II 

THE  NORTH-SEMITIC  TERRITORY  AND  ITS  INHABITANTS 
§  17-26.     P.  18-26 

§  17.  General  outlines  of  the  North-Semitic  region  —  §  18.  Divisions 
of  the  Semitic  race  —  §  19.  Imperfections  of  the  ethnological  classifica- 
tion—  §20.  Original  location  of  the  Semites  and  the  nature  of  their 

xi 


CONTENTS 


beginnings  —  §21.  North  Arabia  the  probable  starting-place  of  their 
migrations  —  §  22.  Physical  divisions  of  the  North-Semitic  region  — 
§  23.  Earliest  movements ;  the  Babylonians  —  §  24.  Settlement  of  the 
Canaanites —  §25.  Migrations  of  the  Aramaeans  —  §26.  Movements  of 
the  Hebraic  peoples 

CHAPTER   III 

CONSTITUTION  AND  CHARACTER  OF  THE  NORTH-SEMITIC  COMMUNITIES 
§  27-69.     P.  27-76 

§  27.  Ancient  condition  of  the  North-Semitic  region  as  contrasted  with 
the  present  —  §  28.  Broad  contrast  between  Semites  and  Western  Aryans 
in  the  matter  of  political  organization  —  §  29.  Limited  capacity  of  the 
Semites  for  federation  and  unification  —  §  30.  Types  and  stages  of  Semitic 
government  —  §  31.  The  first  and  most  characteristic  stage  of  progress, 
the  founding  of  cities  —  §  32.  Distinction  from  the  European  type  of  city 

—  §  33.  Suggestive  Semitic  terms  for  civic  communities  —  §  34.  Earliest 
growth  of  the  city  from  simpler  conditions  —  §  35.  Subsequent  progress 
effected    rather   by  accretion    than    by  more   complex   organization  — 
§  36.  Development  from  the  old  patriarchal  system  ;  chiefs,  elders,  king- 
lets —  §  37.  Multiplication  of  independent  city-states  —  §  38.  Adjuncts 
and  environments  of  the  city  —  §  39.  Second  stage  of  political  develop- 
ment ;  suzerains  and  subject  states  —  §  40.  In  the  highest  forms  of  Se- 
mitic go vernment  the  old  ' '  city ' '  type  still  preserved  —  §41.  A  third  type 
of  settlement  formed  by  colonizing  ;  illustrations  from  Hebraic,  Aramajan, 
and  Assyrian  communities  —  §  42.  The  Phoenician  maritime  settlements 

—  §  43.  Their  exceptional  tendency  to  democracy  —  §  44.  Mutual  rela- 
tions of  the  cities  of  Phoenicia  proper  —  §  45.  Results  of  the  absence  of 
agriculture  in  the  Phoenician  communities  —  §  46.  Fourth  type :  develop- 
ment of  the  nation  directly  through  tribal  federation,  an  exceptional  phe- 
nomenon—  §  47.  Conditions  under  which  such  an  evolution  was  effected 

—  §  48.  Development  of  the  four  Hebraic  nationalities  —  §  49.  Decisive 
epochs  or  stages  in  the  growth  of  the  Hebrew  nation ;  the  "Judges" — 
§  50.  Processes  of  the  monarchical  stage  in  Israel  —  §  51.  Essential  dis- 
tinction between   "judges"    and   "kings"  —  §52.  Advantages  of  the 
ideal   Hebrew  decentralized  type   of  monarchy  —  §  53.  Its  capacity  of 
peaceful  incorporation  of  outsiders  —  §  54.  The  Semitic  communities  as  a 
whole  ;  their  possible  and  actual  leagues  and  combinations  —  §  55.  Alli- 
ances based  on  vassalage  —  §  56.  Instability  of  the  Semitic  states  from 
their  repugnance  to  delegated  power  —  §  57.  Belief  of  the  race  that  the 
Deity  was  the  sole  agent  in  human  affairs,  and  the  rulers  the  vicegerents 
of  the  gods  —  §  58.  Religion  the  fundamental  unifying  and  dividing  prin- 
ciple ;  the  land  inseparable  from  its  god  —  §  59.  Syncretism  of  worship, 
its  occasions  and  results  ;  local  and  ethnical  deities  —  §  60.  Explanation  of 
Semitic  pantheons  —  §  61 .  Consequences  to  religion  and  worship  of  con- 
quest and  revolution  —  §  62.  The  nature  of  the  Hebrew  religion  accounts 


CONTENTS 


for  its  survival  of  national  decay  —  §  63.  The  Hebrews  were  also  more 
truly  a  "nation"  than  the  kindred  communities  —  §  64.  The  three  most 
representative  and  important  Semitic  systems  of  government  —  §  65.  Gen- 
ius and  achievements  of  Babylonians  and  Assyrians  —  §  66.  Range  and 
character  of  the  activity  of  the  Phoenicians  —  §67.  Services  rendered  to 
our  race  by  the  Hebrews  as  contrasted  with  those  of  the  Phoenicians  — 
§  68.  Contrast  between  the  Hebrews  and  the  Assyrians  —  §  69.  Contrast 
with  the  Babylonians 


BOOK  II 

THE  BABYLONIANS 

CHAPTER   I 

EARLIEST  INHABITANTS  OF  BABYLONIA,  THEIR  ENVIRONMENT,  AND 
THEIR  CIVILIZATION.     §  70-85.     P.  77-95 

§  70.  The  Hebrews  a  modern  people  as  compared  with  the  Baby- 
lonians—  §71.  Main  conditions  of  Babylonian  civilization;  course  of 
the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  —  §  72.  Physical  adjuncts  and  concomitants  of 
the  Rivers  —  §  73.  Limits  of  Babylonia  proper  —  §  74.  Limits  of  Assyria 
proper  —  §  75.  The  Middle  Euphrates  region,  Mesopotamia  proper  — 
§  76.  Sense  in  which  the  total  history  of  the  River  region  may  be  called 
Babylonian  —  §  77.  Divisions  of  Babylonian  history  —  §  78.  Divisions  of 
the  closely  related  Assyrian  history  —  §  79.  Questions  as  to  the  be- 
ginners of  Babylonian  civilization  —  §  80.  The  "Sumerian"  or  "Akka- 
dian" theory  ;  evidence  for  and  against  from  the  Babylonian  system  of 
writing  —  §  81.  Question  of  the  existence  of  a  pre-Semitic  and  non- 
Semitic  language — §  82.  Subsidiary  testimony  of  an  archaeological  kind 
—  §  83.  Considerations  helping  towards  an  elucidation  of  the  problem  — 
§  84.  Extravagant  conclusions  based  on  the  "Sumerian"  theory  — 
§  85.  Traces  of  early  non-Semitic  peoples  in  Babylonia,  but  no  sure 
proofs  of  their  higher  civilization 

CHAPTER  II 
BABYLONIA  UNDER  SEPARATE  GOVERNMENTS.    §  86-116.    P.  96-139 

§  86.  General  division  into  Northern  and  Southern  Babylonia  — 
§  87.  Discoveries  made  in  North  Babylonia  —  §  88.  Their  date  ascer- 
tained—  §  89.  Kings  of  Sippar  about  4000  B.C.  ;  autobiography  of  Sar- 
gon  I  —  §  90.  Fact  and  legend  in  the  longer  inscriptions  ;  conquests  on 
the  Mediterranean  coastland  —  §  91.  Original  inscriptions  of  the  time  and 
their  story  —  §  92.  Sargon  and  the  range  of  his  dominions  —  §  93.  Sig- 


CONTENTS 


nificance  of  these  facts  for  the  history  of  the  world — §  94.  Akkad  and 
Sippar  —  §  95.  Researches  in  South  Babylonia  ;  earliest  kings  of  Lagash 

—  §  96.  Early  rulers  up  to  Nabu —  §  97.  Relations  of  Nabu  with  Arabia 
and  the  West-land  —  §  98.  Range  of  dominion  and  political  standing  of 
the  princes  of  Lagash  —  §  99.  Source  and  motive  of  the  energy  and  influ- 
ence of  the  great  rulers  of  these  ages  —  §  100.  "  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  " 
next  predominant  —  §  101.  Consolidation  of  communities  under  the  kings 
of  Ur;  Erech,  Larsa,  Eridu  —  §  102.  Temporary  hegemony  of  Ur  in  all 
Babylonia  —  §  103.  Retrogression  in  foreign  enterprise  —  §  10-4.  Period 
of  local  dynasties;   of  Isin ;   the  secand  of  Ur;   of  Erech  —  §  105.  Re- 
trospective summary  ;   range  of  Babylonian  influence  and  direction  of 
progress  —  §  106.    Elamites   in  Babylonia  —  §  107.   Repetition  of   inva- 
sions ;    effect   on   the   sufferers  —  §    108.  The   whole   country  subdued  ; 
Larsa  the  centre  of  Elainitic  authority  —  §  109.  The  story  of  Gen.  xiv.  ; 
identifications — §  110.  Shinar,    Shumer,  and  Akkad  —  §  111.  Shinar  a 
region  about  Babylon  —  §  112.  Babel,  Borsippa,  Merodach,  and  Nebo  — 
§  113.    Amraphel,  king    of    Shinar,  probably    a    king    of    Babylon  — 
§  114.    Hypothetical  identification   and  sketch  of    the  situation  about 
2250  B.C. — §  115.  Review  of  outstanding  conclusions;   antiquity  of  the 
Semitic  civilization  and  people  —  §  116.  Westward  extension  of  Baby- 
lonian power  and  influence  ;  its  significance 

CHAPTER  III 
UNITED  BABYLONIA.     §  117-124.     P.  140-151 

§  117.  Character  and  work  of  Chammurabi,  the  unifier  of  Babylonia 

—  §  118.  Long  and  peaceful    reigns  of    his    dynasty  of   304  years  — 
§  119.   Similar  conditions    during  the   next    dynasty   of    368    years  — 
§  120.  The  new  dynasty  of  the  Kasshites  ;  their  origin  and  immigrations 
— §  121.  Predominance    and  vitality  of    the    old    Babylonian    culture 

—  §  122.  Underlying  causes  of  this  phenomenon  in  the  genius  of  the 
people  —  §  123.  Political  character  of  the  regime  ;    relations  with   the 
West-land  —  §  124.    Gradual    decline    of    Babylonia,  and   its  external 
occasions 


CONTENTS 


BOOK  III 

CANAANITES,  EGYPTIANS,  AND  HETTITES 


CHAPTER  I 
PALESTINE  AND  ITS  EARLIEST  PEOPLES.     §  125-133.     P.  152-162 

§  125.  The  West-land  and  the  earliest  settlements  of  the  Semites  — 
§  126.  Their  occupation  of  Canaan  and  relatively  slow  development  — 
§  127.  Multiplicity  of  communities  —  §  128.  Palestine  a  vantage-ground 
for  the  greater  nationalities  —  §  129.  The  primitive  inhabitants ;  promi- 
nence of  the  Canaanites  —  §  130.  Explanation  of  minor  ethnological  terms 

—  §   131.    "  Canaanite "   and    "Amorite"    in   the    Hebrew    records  — 
§  132.  Egyptian  notions  of  Palestine  and  Syria  —  §  133.  Babylonian  and 
Assyrian  conceptions 

CHAPTER  II 
THE  ASIATIC  WEST-LAND  AND  EGYPT.     §  134-155.     P.  163-189 

§  134.  Relations  of  Egypt  with  North-west  Arabia  —  §  135.  Asso- 
ciations of  Egypt  with  Palestine  —  §  136.  The  Hyksos  —  §  137.  Canaan- 
itic  elements  among  Asiatic  invaders  of  Egypt  —  §  138.  Palestine  about 
2000  B.C.  mostly  a  land  of  shepherds  —  §  139.  Its  towns  and  cities  — 
§  140.  The  coastland  —  §  141.  The  highways  of  international  traffic  — 
§  142.  Development  of  Palestine  in  the  succeeding  centuries  ;  Babylonian 
influence  —  §  143.  Egyptian  enterprise  in  Asia  after  the  expulsion  of  the 
"  Shepherds  "  —  §  144.  Resultant  growth  of  the  aggressive  spirit  in  Egypt 

—  §  145.  Conquest  in  Asia  in  the  sixteenth  and  fifteenth  centuries  B.C.  — 
§  146.  One-sidedness  and  inadequacy  of  the  official  Egyptian  reports  ;  dis- 
covery of  the  Amarna  cuneiform  tablets  —  §  147.   Period  illustrated  by 
these  documents;   abortive  reforming  enterprises  of  Amenophis  IV  — 
§  148.  Place  of  discovery  and  character  of  the  inscriptions  —  §  149.  Let- 
ters between  the  Babylonian  and  Egyptian  courts  —  §  150.  Letters  from 
Assyria  and  West  Mesopotamia  —  §  151.  Letters  from  Egyptian  viceroys 
and  prefects  in  Syria  and  Palestine  —  §  152.  The  localities  interested  and 
their  political  attitude  —  §  153.  Testimony  to  the  prevalence  and  range  of 
earlier  Babylonian  influence  in  Syria  and  Palestine  —  §  154.  Indications 
given  of  the  degree  of  civilization  attained  by  the  peoples  of  these  regions 

—  §  155.  Outline  of  the  contemporary  political  situation 


xvi  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  HI 
THE  HETTITES  IN  STRIA.    §  156-167.    P.  190-205 

§  156.  Obscurities  surrounding  the  origin  and  history  of  the  Hettites 
—  §  157.  Prevailing  theory  of  their  northern  origin  and  extension  through- 
out Asia  Minor  and  Syria  —  §  158.  Altaic  or  Mongolian  origin  claimed 
for  them  —  §159.  Various  dissident  opinions  —  §160.  The  Hettites  in  Syria 
from  very  remote  times —  §  161.  Historical  role  played  by  the  Hettites  in 
Syria  and  Palestine  —  §  162.  Their  progress  there  and  the  nature  of  their 
occupation  —  §  163.  Their  opposition  to  the  aggressive  nineteenth  Egyp- 
tian Dynasty;  conflicts  and  treaties — §164.  Consequences  to  Palestine 
of  the  protracted  struggle  —  §  165.  The  Hebrew  colony  in  Egypt  — 
§  166.  Decline  of  Egyptian  power ;  invasions  from  the  coasts  of  the 
Mediterranean  ;  their  influence  on  Palestine  —  §  167.  Probable  date  of 
the  Hebrew  Exodus  from  Egypt 


BOOK  IV 

ASSYRIANS  AND  BABYLONIANS 

ASSYRIA  TO  THE  ERA  OF  HER  PREDOMINANCE.    §  168-181.    P.  206-223 

§  168.  Character  and  genius  of  the  Assyrians  —  §  169.  Striking  moral 
aspects  of  Assyrian  life  and  history  —  §  170.  Periods  of  Assyrian  history 
—  §  171.  The  founders  of  Asshur  and  the  first  colonists  —  §  172.  First 
settlements  growing  into  a  semi-independent  principality  —  §  173.  Indi- 
cations of  independent  action  in  western  lands  by  Assyria  —  §  174.  In- 
fluence of  early  struggles  on  the  national  character  and  aims ;  rivalry 
with  Babylonia  —  §  175.  Treaties  and  successful  wars  with  Babylonia; 
building  up  of  Nineveh  —  §  176.  Period  of  quiescence  in  Assyria ;  her 
advantageous  position  for  the  future  —  §  177.  Renewed  conflicts  with 
Babylonia  with  varied  fortunes  —  §  178.  A  new  era  in  both  Assyria  and 
Babylonia  ;  the  fate  of  Mesopotamia  —  §  179.  Conquests  of  Tiglathpileser 
I  —  §  180.  His  struggle  with  Babylon  and  achievements  in  the  arts  of 
peace  — §  181.  Period  of  inactivity  and  decline  for  both  Assyria  and 
Babylonia 


CONTENTS 


BOOK  V 

HEBREWS,  CANAANITES,  AND  ARAM&ANS 

CHAPTER  I 
9 
TRIBAL  SETTLEMENTS  OF  ISRAEL.     §  182-194.     P.  224-237 

§  182.  Preparation  for  the  Hebrews  in  Palestine  — §  183.  Events  from 
the  Exodus  till  the  beginning  of  the  occupation  —  §  184.  Condition  of 
Canaan  at  the  time  of  the  invasion  —  §  185.  Progress  of  the  invaders  under 
Joshua  —  §  180.  Tribal  acquisitions  and  allotments  —  §  187.  Obstacles 
to  the  settlement  —  §  188.  Vassalage  to  Mesopotamians,  Moabites,  and 
Northern  Canaanites  —  §  189.  Midianite  oppression  ;  its  overthrow  and 
results  —  §  190.  The  Hebrews  east  of  the  Jordan  — §  191.  Jephthah,  the 
Ammonites  and  Ephraimites  —  §  192.  The  Philistines;  their  origin,  politi- 
cal expansion,  and  first  attacks  upon  Israel  —  §  193.  The  Danites  and 
Samson  —  §  194.  Prospect  of  Philistian  predominance 

CHAPTER  II 
FOUNDING  OF  THE  HEBREW  MONARCHY.     §  195-209.     P.  238-253 

§  195.  Monarchy  a  necessity  of  the  political  and  social  situation  — 
§  196.  Saul  of  Benjamin  and  his  kingly  acts  —  §  197.  His  defects  as  a 
statesman  and  leader ;  the  secession  of  David  and  his  following  — 
§  198.  Triumph  of  the  Philistines  and  death  of  Saul  —  §  199.  Date  of  the 
new  kingdom  ;  its  rude  and  rudimentary  character  —  §  200.  The  tribes 
of  Israel  among  the  Canaanites  and  Philistines  —  §  201.  Aramaeans  and 
Hettites  in  Syria  —  §  202.  Leading  Aramaean  settlements  —  §  203.  Phil- 
istine suzerainty  over  Israel ;  Abner,  Joab,  and  the  enthronement  of 
David  —  §  204.  Expulsion  of  the  Philistines ;  Jerusalem  made  the 
capital  ;  subjection  of  the  neighbouring  Hebraic  communities  and  of  the 
Aramaeans  —  §  205.  Organization  of  the  kingdom  and  its  centralizing 
influences  ;  internal  disturbances  —  §  206.  Excess  of  the  centralizing 
policy  under  Solomon,  and  its  disrupting  influence  —  §  207.  Policy  of 
foreign  alliances,  especially  with  Egypt  —  §208.  Schism,  under  Jero- 
boam, of  the  northern  tribes  —  §  209.  Loss  of  the  subject  states  and  of 
influence  in  Palestine 

CHAPTER  m. 
DIVIDED  ISRAEL  AND  ITS  NEIGHBOURS.     §  210-215.     P.  254-260 

§  210.  The  two  Hebrew  kingdoms  after  the  schism  ;  hostile  relations  ; 
Egyptian  raid;  Rehoboam  and  Abijah  —  §  211.  Distractions  in  the 


CONTEXTS 


Northern  Kingdom  under  Jeroboam's  successors  ;  continued  hostilities 
between  the  kingdoms ;  appeal  of  Asa,  the  Southern  king,  to  the 
Aramaeans  —  §  212.  Anarchy  in  the  North  ended  by  Omri ;  founding  of 
Samaria;  lengthened  peace  between  the  kingdoms  —  §213.  Close  rela- 
tions of  the  Northern  Kingdom  with  foreigners,  especially  the  Phre- 
nicians ;  consequences  to  the  state,  and  to  the  religion  of  Jehovah  — 
§  214.  The  order  of  Prophets  ;  significance  of  their  ministry  at  this 
political  and  religious  juncture  —  §  215.  Raid  of  Egyptians  and  Cushites 
against  Judah  ;  progress  of  that  kingdom  under  Jehoshaphat ;  league 
with  Ahab  against  the  Aramaeans  ;  battle  of  Ramoth-Gilead 


BOOK  VI 

HEBREWS,  ARAMAEANS,  AND  ASSYRIANS 

CHAPTER  I 
ASSYRIAN  ADVANCE  INTO  THE  WEST-LAND.     §  216-234.     P.  261-280 

§  216.  Revival  of  Assyrian  ambition  in  the  ninth  century  B.C.  — 
§  217.  Assyrian  aims  of  conquest  during  this  epoch  —  §  218.  Subjugation 
under  Asshurnasirpal  of  the  northern  tribes  and  Mesopotamia — §  219.  Sub- 
mission of  Northern  Syria  and  the  Phoenician  cities  —  §  220.  Kalach 
(Nimrud)  the  royal  residence  ;  achievements  and  character  of  this  typical 
Assyrian  monarch  —  §221.  Policy  and  genius  of  Shalmaneser  II  — 
§222.  Indecisive  struggles  with  the  Armenians  —  §223.  Affairs  in  Baby- 
lonia ;  rise  of  the  Chaldaeans  —  §  224.  Temporary  subjugation  of  Babylo- 
nia by  Shalmaneser,  and  of  Median  tribes  —  §  225.  Prospective  summary 
of  enterprises  to  the  west  of  the  Euphrates  —  §  226.  Contemporary  divi- 
sions and  peoples  of  Syria  —  §227.  Conquests  in  Northern  Syria  — 
§  228.  Principal  official  account  of  the  first  expedition  to  Southern  Syria 
(B.C.  854)  —  §229.  Supplementary  details  of  the  battle  of  Karkar  — 
§  230.  Character  of  the  confederacy  formed  against  the  Assyrians  — 
§  231.  Explanation  of  the  rapprochement  between  Northern  Israel  and 
Damascus  —  §  232.  Theory  that  the  former  served  against  the  Assyrians 
as  a  vassal  of  the  latter  —  §  233.  Considerations  that  weigh  against  this 
assumption  —  §  234.  Importance  of  the  subject  as  giving  reliable  chrono- 
logical data 


CONTEXTS 


CHAPTER   II 

ISRAEL  AND  THE  CONFLICTS  OF  ASSYRIA  AND  DAMASCUS 
§  235-254.     P.  281-302 

§  235.  Continued  decline  of  Israel ;  superiority  of  Damascus,  and 
revolt  of  Moab  —  §  236.  Loss  of  Edom  to  Judah  ;  siege  of  Samaria  by  the 
Syrians  ;  fall  of  the  house  of  Omri  —  §  237.  Survival  of  Israel  under  the 
attacks  of  Damascus  explained ;  further  operations  of  Shalmaneser  in 
Southern  Syria  —  §  238.  Israel  neutral  in  relation  to  Shalmaneser  — 
§  239.  Political  and  religious  condition  of  Northern  Israel  under  the 
dynasty  of  Omri  —  §240.  Jehu's  mission  and  failure  —  §241.  Death  of 
Benhadad  II ;  usurpation  of  Hazael —  §  242.  Shalmaneser  again  in  South- 
ern Syria  ;  defeat  of  Hazael ;  homage  to  the  Assyrians  rendered  by  Jehu 

—  §  243.  Record  and  significance  of  this  transaction;  revival  of  Damascus 
and  sufferings  of  Israel  under  Hazael  —  §  244.  Prevision  and  retrospect 
of  Prophecy  —  §  245.  Calamities  under  the  regime  of  Jehu  —  §  246.  Un- 
expected relief  under  Jehoahaz,  and  its  occasion  —  §  247.  The  Assyrian 
empire  overstrained  by  Shalmaneser  II ;  conservative  policy  of  his  suc- 
cessor and  his  campaigns  in  the  East  left  the   West  undisturbed  — 
§  248.  Ramman-niraii  III,  and  the  range  of  his  conquests  —  §  249.  His 
queen  "Semiramis"  and  Babylon  —  §  250.  His  campaigns  in  the  West ; 
Syria,  Phoenicia,   Edom,    Israel  —  §251.  Capitulation    of    Damascus  — 
§  252.  The  Biblical  records  explained  and  supplemented  —  §  253.  Israel 
saved  by  prompt  submission  to  the  invaders  —  §  254.  The  fortunes  of 
Judah  up  to  the  reconquest  of  Edom  by  Amaziah 

CHAPTER   III 

EXPANSION  OF  ISRAEL  DURING  ASSYRIAN  INACTION 
§  255-278.     P.  303-322 

§  255.  Characterization  of  Assyrian  history  during  the  next  half- 
century  —  §  256.  Shalmaneser  III  and  the  growth  of  Armenia  — 
§  257.  Loss  of  acquisitions  in  the  West  —  §  258.  Insurrections  and  other 
disasters  under  the  succeeding  kings  —  §  259.  Commercial  and  social 
misfortune  ;  celestial  portents  ;  prospect  of  a  general  collapse  of  the 
empire  —  §260.  Revival  of  the  fortunes  of  the  Hebrews:  temporary 
check  of  Judah  through  Amaziah's  imbroglio  with  the  northern  kingdom 

—  §  261.  No  prolonged  feud  between  the  Hebrew  monarchies  ;  Amaziah's 
death   by  violence  —  §  262.  Progress  and  extension  of   Northern   Israel 
under  Joash  and  Jeroboam  II  —  §  263.  Favourable   occasions  for  such 
recuperation  —  §  264.  The  shady  side  of  the  historical  picture  shown  by 
the  Prophets  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  ;  allusions  to  public  and  private 
calamities  by  Joel  and  Amos  —  §  265.  Synchronisms  of  the  eclipse  and 
pestilence  —  §  266.  Success  in  war  gained  at  the  expense  of  domestic 


CONTENTS 


contentment  and  prosperity  —  §267.  Troubles  and  violence  under  the 
successors  of  Jeroboam  II  —  §  268.  Enterprise  and  achievements  of  Uz- 
ziah  in  Judah  —  §  269.  Regency  and  sole  reign  of  his  son  Jotham  ;  con- 
tinued outward  prosperity  of  the  people  —  §  270.  Combination  of  North- 
ern Israel  and  Damascus  against  Judah  —  §  271.  Disintegrating  forces  too 
strong  for  the  Northern  Kingdom,  resisted  in  the  Southern  —  §  272.  Ju- 
dah's  first  advantage  ;  compactness  of  territory  and  homogeneity  of  pop- 
ulation —  §  273.  Judah  had  less  dangerous  hostile  surroundings  — 
§  274.  Illustrations  from  the  history  of  Northern  Israel  —  §  275.  Judali's 
natural  tribal  unity  —  §  276.  Jerusalem  a  stronger  unifying  centre  than 
Samaria  —  §277.  Relations  between  the  administration  and  the  people 
more  agreeable  and  stable  in  the  Southern  Kingdom  —  §  278.  Contrast 
between  the  two  kingdoms  in  permanence  of  dynastic  rule 

CHAPTER   IV 

THE  NEW  ASSYRIAN  POLICY  AND  HEBREW  PROPHECY 
§  279-304.    P.  323-346 

§  279.  New  epoch  created  by  the  founder  of  a  new  Assyrian  dynasty  — 
§  280.  Personality  and  doubtful  origin  of  Tiglathpileser  III  — §  281.  Cir- 
cumstances and  probable  occasion  of  his  accession  to  the  throne  — 
§  282.  Results  of  previous  enterprise  of  the  Assyrian  monarchs  ;  the  real 
task  for  the  would-be  world-conquerors  —  §  283.  Details  of  Tiglathpil- 
eser's  plans  of  conquest  and  organization  —  §284.  Problem  of  dealing 
with  the  newly  conquered  larger  states  —  §  285.  Importance  of  the  ques- 
tion of  the  relations  of  the  subject  states  to  the  Assyrian  monarchy  — 
§286.  First  stage:  autonomous  administration  retained  by  the  vassals; 
various  forms  of  this  relation  —  §  287.  Second  stage  :  that  of  states  in 
constructive  rebellion  or  actual  insurrection  for  the  first  time  —  §  288.  Third 
stage :  rebellious  states  on  last  probation  ;  annexation,  deportation  — 
§  289.  Effectiveness  of  these  drastic  methods  —  §  290.  The  policy  from 
the  standpoint  of  religious  motive  —  §  291.  Some  consequential  bene- 
fits of  the  policy  —  §  292.  The  problem  for  Israel  —  §  293.  Operations 
of  Tiglathpileser  in  Babylonia  against  Aramaeans  and  Chaldaeans  — 
§  294.  March  to  the  West ;  siege  and  capture  of  Arpad ;  defeat  of  the 
Armenian  league  ;  annexation  of  Northern  and  Middle  Syria  —  §  295.  The 
Hebrew  Prophets  ;  significance  of  written  Prophecy  at  the  present  epoch 
—  §  296.  Political  and  social  changes  and  abuses  which  engaged  the 
interest  of  the  Prophets  —  §  297.  Israel's  moral  and  religious  weal  as 
connected  with  its  political  policy  —  §  298.  Effect  on  the  social  fabric  of 
the  cultivation  of  foreign  relations  —  §  299.  Dependence  upon  foreigners 
to  be  dreaded  as  endangering  faith  and  worship  —  §  300.  Foresight  of 
national  failure  and  foreign  domination  —  §  301.  Prevision  of  captivity 
in  the  earliest  of  the  Prophecies  —  §  302.  Prophetic  insight  and  foresight 
of  Amos  —  §  303.  Such  views  consistently  held  by  patriots  —  §  304.  The 
issues  made  clearer  as  the  action  was  unfolded 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER   V 
NORTHERN  ISRAEL  A  VASSAL  TO  ASSYRIA.     §  305-316.     P.  347-358 

§  305.  Tiglathpileser  III  proceeds  against  Southern  Syria  — 
§  306.  While  Israel  under  Menahem  is  enfeebled,  the  Syrians  seek  help 
from  Uzziah  of  Judah  —  §  307.  Hamath  and  its  dependencies  are  subdued 
and  annexed;  Uzziah's  auxiliary  force  probably  dispersed  —  §308.  Ju- 
dah henceforth  an  isolated  principality,  and  finally  yields  to  the  Assyrians 
—  §  309.  The  repulse  and  isolation  of  Judah  perhaps  indicated  in  Isa.  i  — 
§  310.  The  submission  of  Northern  Israel  under  Menahem  in  the  monu- 
ments and  the  Bible  —  §  311.  Three  years'  absence  of  Tiglathpileser  from 
the  Mediterranean  coast-lands ;  campaigns  in  Media  and  Armenia  — 
§  312.  Return  to  Palestine  ;  comments  of  the  Prophet  Hosea  on  the 
situation  in  Israel  —  §  313.  Hosea  on  the  question  of  help  from  Egypt  — 
§  314.  His  views  on  the  approaching  absorption  into  Assyria  and  its  les- 
sons —  §  315.  Allusions  by  the  author  of  Zech.  ix-xi  —  §  316.  Events  in 
Northern  Israel  leading  up  to  the  catastrophe 

CHAPTER  VI 

VASSALAGE  OF  JCDEA  AND  THE  PROPHETIC  INTERVENTION 
§  317-330.     P.  359-371 

§  317.  The  reign  of  Ahaz  a  turning-point  in  the  history  of  Judah  — 
§  318.  Isaiah's  ideal  and  the  actuality  —  §  319.  The  prophetic  view  of 
the  conditions  and  chances  of  national  salvation  —  §  320.  Disloyalty  to 
Jehovah;  testimony  of  Amos  and  Hosea  —  §  321.  Isaiah  and  Micah  on 
false  worship  and  the  concomitant  vices  —  §  322.  Un-Israelitish  character 
of  sensual  indulgences  —  §  323.  Judah  in  the  wake  of  Northern  Israel ; 
other  popular  vices  —  §  324.  Explanation  of  prophetic  interest  in  foreign 
nations  —  §  325.  Progress  of  the  campaign  of  Samaria  and  Damascus 
against  Judah  —  §  326.  The  appeal  of  Ahaz  to  Tiglathpileser,  and  Lsaiah's 
formal  protest  —  §  327.  A  twofold  omen  and  pledge  —  §  328.  Present 
relief  overshadowed  by  coming  disasters  —  §  329.  Significance  of  succes- 
sive portents  —  §  330.  Impending  fate  of  Damascus  and  Samaria 

CHAPTER  VII 
THE  ASSYRIANS  IN  PALESTINE  AND  BABYLONIA.    §  331-341.    P.  372-381 

§  331.  Campaign  of  734  in  Palestine ;  annexation  of  territory  in  the 
north  —  §  332.  Operations  on  the  coastland  ;  conquest  of  Samaria  ;  a 
new  vassal  king — §  333.  Damascus  kept  in  check  —  §  334.  Fortunes  of 
an  Arabian  queen  and  her  allies  —  §  335.  Capture  of  Damascus  and  its  an- 
nexation —  §  336.  Ahaz  of  Judah  among  the  tributaries  —  §  337.  Status 
of  the  country  east  of  the  Jordan  —  §  338.  Submission  of  Phoenicia  and 


CONTENTS 


Tabal  — §  339.  Subjection  of  Babylonia;  the  Aramaeans  —  §  340.  The 
Chaldaeans ;  Merodachbaladan  —  §  341.  Monuments  of  Tiglathpileser 
and  their  fate 

CHAPTER  VIII 
REVOLT  AND  DOWNFALL  OF  SAMARIA.     §  342-364.     P.  382-401 

§342.  Shalmaneser  IV  and  the  records  of  his  deeds  — §343.  The 
Book  of  Kings  and  Shalmaneser  —  §344.  Hoshea,  the  vassal  king  of 
Samaria,  and  his  attitude  towards  the  imperial  authority ;  looking  to 
Egypt  —  §  345.  The  Libyan  regime  in  Egypt  —  §  346.  The  new  Ethio- 
pian dynasty;  early  history  of  Ethiopia — §  347.  The  Ethiopians  in 
Lower  Egypt  —  §  348.  Motives  to  aggressive  action  in  Asia ;  the  weak- 
ness of  Egypt  as  ally  or  enemy  —  §  349.  Movements  of  Shalmaneser; 
Hoshea  intriguing  with  Egypt  against  his  suzerain  —  §  350.  Disappoint- 
ment and  seizure  of  Hoshea  —  §  351.  Samaria  besieged  —  §  352.  The  con- 
dition of  the  besieged  and  their  city  —  §  353.  The  issue  of  the  siege  and 
the  bearing  of  the  defenders  —  §  354.  Attitude  of  Prophecy  towards 
Samaria  in  its  latest  history  —  §  355.  Isaiah  and  Samaria  —  §  356.  Micah 
and  Samaria  —  §  357.  Progress  of  the  siege  and  death  of  Shalmaneser  — 
§  358.  Accession  of  Sargon  II  —  §  359.  Influence  and  personality  of  the 
new  king  —  §  360.  His  report  of  the  capture  of  Samaria  —  §  361.  Subse- 
quent treatment  of  the  colony  and  province  —  §  362.  The  deportation  — 
§  363.  The  supposed  "dispersion  of  the  Ten  Tribes"  — §  364.  Political 
significance  of  the  annexation  ;  the  policy  of  the  conqueror 


APPENDIX. 
P.  403-425 

NOTE  PAGE 

1.  Grouping  of  the  Semitic  Languages 403 

2.  Malik  and  malk 404 

3.  Phoenician  Colonization 404 

4.  "  Amorite  "  and  "  Canaanite  " 406 

5.  Aramaeans  and  Later  Hettites  in  Syria  408 

6.  Basis  of  Oriental  Chronology 409 

7.  Semiramis 411 

8.  "  Pul  "  and  Tiglathpileser  III 412 

9.  Tiglathpileser  III  and  Azariah  of  Judah 413 

10.  "King  Yareb  " 415 

11.  Date  of  Zech.  ix-xi 416 

12.  The  sign  "  Immanuel  " 417 

13.  Tiglathpileser  III  in  Palestine 420 

14.  The  name  "  Seve  " 422 

15.  Sargon  II  and  his  Monuments 423 

16.  Inscriptions  relating  to  Samaria 425 


LIST  OF  ABBREVIATIONS 


The  following  are  the  abbreviations  used  in  Vol.  I  which 
are  not  self-explanatory  :  — 

AD.         =  G.  Smith,  Assyrian  Discoveries,  3d  ed.,  1876. 

AN.         =  The  great  inscription  of  Asshurnasirpal,  in  I  K.  17-26. 

ATU.      =  Das  Alte  Testament,  in  Verbindiing  with  Professor  Baethgen, 

Professor  Guthe,  etc.,  ilbersetzt  von  E.  Kautzsch,  1892-1894. 
Bab.  Chr.  =  The  Babylonian  Chronicle,  published  in  ZA.  Ill,  p.  148, 

and  in  PSBA.,  1889,  p.  131. 

BAG.      =  Tiele,  Babylonisch-Assyrische  Geschichte,  1886,  1888. 

Br.  M.     =  British  Museum. 

Cb.  =  The  second  Assyrian  "Eponym  Canon,"  in  Delitzsch,  Assyr- 

ische  Lesestilcke,  2d  ed.,  1878,  p.  92-94. 
FM.         =  G.  Rawlinson,    The  Five  Great  Monarchies  of  the  Ancient 

Eastern  World,  3  vols.,  New  York,  1881. 
GA.         =  Meyer,  Geschichte  des  Alterthums,  Vol.  I,  1884. 
GBA.      =  Hommel,  Geschichte  Babyloniens  und  Assijriens,  1888  ;   also 

=  Winckler,  Geschichte  Babyloniens  und  Assyriens,  1892. 
GH.         =  Kittel,  Geschichte  der  Hebraer,  1888,  1892. 
GVI.       =  Stade,  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israels,  1887,  1888. 
Intr.        =  Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament, 

1891. 

K.  =  Kouyunjik,  i.e.   the   list  of  tablets  in  the  British  Museum 

found  in  that  locality. 

KAT.      =  Schrader,  Keilinschriften   und  das  Alte    Testament,  2d  ed., 
1883. 

KB.         =  Keilinschriftliche  Bibliothek,  edited  by  Schrader,  Vols.  I-III, 
1889-1892. 

KGF.      =  Schrader,  Keilinschriften  und  Geschichtsforschung,  1878. 
Lay.        =  Layard,  Inscriptions  in  the  Cuneiform  Character,  1851. 
Mon.       =  Monolith  inscription  of  Shalmaneser  II,  in  III  R.  7,  8. 

xxiii 


LIST   OF   ABBREVIATIONS 


Obel.       =  Obelisk  inscription  of  Shalmaneser  II,  in  Lay.  87-98. 

OBT.  I  =  Hilprecht,  The  Babylonian  Expedition  of  the  University  of 

Pennsylvania :   Cuneiform  Texts,  Vol.  I,  Part  I,  1893. 
OT.         =  Old  Testament. 

PAOS.    =  Proceedings  of  the  American  Oriental  Society, 
Par.         =  Delitzsch,  Wo  lag  das  Paradies  ?  1881. 
PSBA.     =  Proceedings  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archaeology. 
R.  (I,  II,  III,  IV,  V)  =  Cuneiform  Inscriptions  of  Western  Asia,  Vols. 

I-V,  1861-1891  ;   issued  under  the  auspices  of  Sir  Henry 

Rawlinson   and   edited  by   Norris,    Smith,  and   Pinches ; 

IV  R2.  =  Vol.  IV,  2d  ed. 

RP.         =  Mecords  of  the  Past ;  RP2.  =  2d  edition  of  the  same. 
Sb.  =  The   second   Syllabary  in  Delitzsch,  Assyrische  Lesestiicke, 

3ded.,  p.  53-64. 

ST.          =  Winckler,  Keilschrifttexte  Sargon's,  2  vols.,  1889. 
SV.         =  Hommel,  Semitische  Vollcer  und  Sprachen,  Vol.  I,  1883. 
Synchr.  Hist.  =  Texts  giving  a  "synchronistic  history"  of  Assyria  and 

Babylonia,  in  II  R.  66  with  III  R.  4,  and  in  UAG.  p.  148- 

152. 

TP.          =  Inscription  of  Tiglathpileser  I,  in  I  R.  9-16. 
TSBA.    =  Transactions  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archaeology. 
UAG.      =  Winckler,  Untersuchungen  zur  altorientalischen  Geschichte~, 

1889. 

ZA.         =  Zeitschrift  fur  Assyriologie. 
ZATW.  =  Zeitschrift  fur  alttestamentliche  Wissenschaft. 


BOOK  I 

• 

THE  NORTHERN  SEMITES 
CHAPTER  I 

THE   SEMITES  IN   HISTORY 

§  1.  THE  study  of  History  is  chiefly  valuable  for  its 
moral  significance  and  influence.  It  does  indeed  aid  our 
intellectual  development  as  no  other  study  can.  It  fixes 
our  attention  upon  the  world  of  men  and  human  society, 
widens  our  horizon  of  sympathetic  observation,  varies 
indefinitely  the  subjects  of  our  reflection,  and  perpetu- 
ally changes  our  point  of  view.  It  thus  corrects  narrow 
inductions,  rectifies  hasty  judgments,  and  steadies  and 
sobers  the  practical  imagination  for  the  affairs  of  life. 
But  it  does  a  greater  and  more  potent  work  in  helping  to 
excite  the  emotions  and  move  the  will;  for  through  the 
understanding  it  reaches  and  stirs  up  to  activity  the  forces 
and  agencies  that  build  up  character,  that  indicate  duty, 
and  that  prompt  to  action.  No  man  can  study  aright  the 
history  of  the  past  without  a  purification  of  the  inner  be- 
ing and  an  energizing  of  the  active  powers.  The  drama 
of  the  present  life  is  indeed  being  enacted  continually 
before  our  eyes,  and  no  one  who  has  senses  to  perceive  or 
a  heart  to  feel  can  fail  to  follow  its  progress  or  to  catch 
its  most  obvious  lessons.  But  when  we  are  admitted  to 
witness  the  struggles  and  fates  of  the  past  history  of 
mankind;  when  the  curtain  is  raised  which  ignorance 


2  AIM   OF   THE    STUDY   OF   HISTORY  BOOK  1 

or  indifference  or  preoccupation  has  drawn  over  the  suf- 
ferings and  achievements  of  our  fellows  in  other  times, 
while  the  figures  that  throng  the  far-reaching  stage  are 
nations  and  races  and  titanic  men,  and  the  eternal  les- 
sons are  enforced  with  endless  variations  of  typical  expe- 
rience and  exemplary  fate,  the  spectator  must  be  moved 
to  thought  and  regard  for  great  human  interests  with 
something  of  the  urgency  of  those  elemental  moral  forces 
that  have  made  the  tragedy  of  the  world's  history  so  pa- 
thetic and  so  sublime.  For  the  plainest  as  well  as  the 
most  valuable  teaching  of  the  long  story  is  that  certain 
ideas,  incarnated  in  national  and  personal  aspiration  and 
effort,  have  enduring  vitality  and  indestructible  force; 
and  that  the  men  whose  struggles  and  triumphs  have 
brought  these  ideas  into  vogue  are  the  world's  greatest 
heroes  and  benefactors.  And  in  every  nation  of  the 
earth,  heathen  or  Christian,  barbarous  or  civilized,  the 
vindication  and  practical  enforcement  of  these  ideas  is, 
and  always  must  be,  a  living  issue,  and  therefore  our 
interest  in  the  events  and  movements  that  have  made  them 
for  us  the  order  of  the  day  can  never  cease  or  languish. 

§  2.  Thus  something  more  than  mere  entertainment  or 
hero-worship  is  the  end  of  the  study  of  Histor}\  What 
we,  "upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  ages  have  come,"  most 
highly  prize  as  the  chief  of  our  moral  gains  is  truth  and 
freedom.  The  one  comes  by  the  other,  for  it  is  the  truth 
that  makes  us  free;  and  when  we  consider  the  ways  in 
which  these  saving  blessings  have  come  to  us  as  our  heri- 
tage from  the  past,  we  are  led  by  a  twofold  path  to  an  out- 
look broader  than  the  arena  of  merely  human  action,  vaster 
than  "the  great  globe  itself,  yea,  all  which  it  inherit." 
When  we  see  how  "  the  thoughts  of  men  are  widened  with 
the  process  of  the  suns,"  we  conclude  with  the  profound- 
est  writer  of  the  Old  Testament  that  "it  is  a  Spirit  in 
man,  and  the  inbreathing  of  an  Almighty  One,  that  gives 
him  understanding."  The  other  line  of  development, 
which  has  regard  to  the  external  conditions  of  the  evolu- 


CH.  I,  §  3  UNITY   OF   ALL   HISTORY  3 

tion  of  light  and  liberty,  points  with  equal  directness  to 
an  extra-human  Providence  that  prepares,  controls,  and 
combines  the  factors  of  history,  and  makes  all  things 
converge  to  and  subserve  the  dominion  of  the  truth  that 
uplifts*  and  saves  humanity. 

§  3.  This  then  is  the  strongest  ground  upon  which  the 
study  of  History,  with  its  auxiliary,  the  study  of  Lan- 
guages, can  be  based  and  defended.  The  widening  of  our 
view,  and  the  liberalizing  of  our  sympathies,  which  this 
century  has  brought  to  us,  especially  through  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Science  of  Language,  have  affected  our  notions 
of  the  scope  and  value  of  historical  study  as  well  as  of 
literature.  Peter's  vision  has  been  realized  for  the  com- 
monwealth of  human  thought  and  aspiration,  and  the  old 
invidious  and  illiberal  distinctions  have  been  abolished. 
We  have  now  learned  that  any  language  and  any  litera- 
ture may  rightly  be  termed  "classical"  which  helps  us  to 
large  and  inspiring  views  of  God  and  man  and  duty,  by 
bringing  to  us  great  and  profound  thoughts  conceived  and 
uttered  in  any  age  of  the  world.  We  have  also  learned, 
from  Comparative  Philology,  of  the  kinship  of  scattered 
races,  and  have  gained  clearer  views  of  the  community  of 
human  need  and  human  endeavour.  Thus  ancient  as  well 
as  modern  history  has  become  more  of  a  humanizing  study, 
worthy  of  a  high  place  among  the  "humanities,"  which 
the  new  ideals  of  education  have  superadded  to  the  narrow 
categories  of  the  old.  We  are  also  learning,  though  more 
slowly,  that  the  most  baseless  of  all  traditional  distinc- 
tions is  that  which  divides  History  into  "sacred  and  secu- 
lar," or  more  wrongly  still,  into  "sacred  and  profane." 
Our  Scriptures  themselves,  in  whose  honour  the  distinc- 
tion is  made,  make  no  such  discrimination.  Nay,  they 
scout  the  idea  of  such  a  schism  as  dishonouring  to  God. 
The  nations  of  the  world  are  not  simply  to  be  brought  to 
God,  they  actually  are  his  from  the  beginning  —  his  insti- 
tutions, his  care,  his  agents.  The  Assyrians  are  the 
instruments  of  his  will  (Isa.  x.  5);  he  not  only  "brought 


4  TASK   OF   THE   HISTORIAN  BOOK  I 

up  Israel  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,"  but  also  "the  Philis- 
tines from  Caphtor  and  the  Aranueans  from  Kir  "  (Amos 
ix.  7).1  The  world  is  ruled  by  the  ideas  of  God.  His- 
tory, which  is  but  the  vindication  and  realization  of  his 
thoughts  through  the  men  of  his  choice,  proves  thes'e  ideas 
to  be  both  irrepressible  and  invincible,  and  points  out  the 
way  to  make  them  victorious  in  these  latter-day  countries 
and  communities,  and  so  to  help  on  the  redemption  of 
humanity  from  the  errors  and  sorrows  that  come  from  the 
denial  of  his  power  and  Godhead. 

§  4.  These  general  reflections  upon  the  purport  and 
aim  of  History  indicate  sufficiently  well  the  function  of 
the  historian.  Since  each  leading  type  of  human  civili- 
zation has  contributed  its  quota  to  the  advancement  of  the 
world  in  knowledge  and  power,  the  historian  has  to  show 
in  his  special  field  how  the  exponents  of  world-moving 
ideas,  whether  races,  communities,  or  individuals,  came 
to  be  in  a  position  to  give  effect  to  their  convictions.  He 
must,  in  other  words,  set  forth  the  antecedents  of  these 
factors  of  History,  the  elements  and  quality  of  their  cul- 
ture, the  character  of  their  religion,  their  political  insti- 
tutions, their  outlook  and  bearing  towards  their  larger 
human  environment.  In  dealing,  for  example,  with  a 
nation  that  has  played  a  large  part  in  the  development  of 
mankind,  it  is  incumbent  upon  him  to  describe  its  set- 
tlement and  early  progress  as  a  distinct  community,  its 
political  and  social  development,  its  interaction  with 
other  nations  or  races,  its  peculiar  type  of  worship  and 
thought,  its  moral  as  well  as  intellectual  characteristics, 
and,  above  all,  the  occasions  and  impulses  by  which  it 
came  to  attain  to  new  conceptions  of  truth  or  clearer 
apprehensions  of  duty. 

1  It  is  noteworthy,  as  illustrating  the  large-minded  fashion  in  which  the 
Hebrew  Prophets  looked  at  the  foreign  nations,  that  the  peoples  here  re- 
ferred to  —  Philistines,  Aramaeans,  and  Assyrians  —  were  precisely  those 
who  had,  up  to  the  times  of  the  respective  authors,  most  seriously  influ- 
enced the  destiny  of  Israel. 


CH.  I,  §  5  ARYANS   AND    SEMITES  6 

§  5.  Our  intellectual  and  moral  gains  from  the  past 
are,  broadly  speaking,  the  resultant  of  two  great  deposits 
of  thought  and  sentiment,  the  one  the  gift  of  the  Aryan, 
the  other  a  boon  from  the  Semitic  race.  To  the  former 
we  owe,  again  speaking  generally,  most  of  our  mental  and 
political  acquisitions ;  to  the  latter,  the  principal  elements 
of  our  moral  and  spiritual  heritage.  The  one  has  come 
to  know  much  of  the  truth  about  man  as  an  intellectual 
and  social  being,  his  capacity  for  thought  and  action,  his 
relation  to  the  outside  world,  and  the  phenomena  and 
processes  of  the  material  universe.  The  other  has  learned 
and  taught  us  the  highest  conceptions  of  man's  spiritual 
nature,  its  illimitable  possibilities,  and  its  primary  needs, 
and  has  brought  near  to  us  the  idea  of  a  personal  God, 
who  is  at  once  the  inspiration  of  our  deepest  yearnings 
and  the  incarnation  of  our  highest  ideals.  The  one  has 
analyzed  and  exhibited  man ;  the  other  has  apprehended 
and  commended  God.  The  one  demonstrates  the  reign  of 
physical,  the  other  makes  us  feel  the  urgency  of  moral 
law.  Aryan  culture  includes  science,  art,  philosophy, 
epic  and  dramatic  poetry,  and  philosophic  history.  Se- 
mitic culture  has  little  of  these  to  show;  it  can  boast  an 
unequalled  lyric  and  gnomic  poetry,  but  in  everything 
else  it  is  subordinate,  imitative,  or  entirely  uncreative.i 
The  Aryan  genius  ranges  far  and  wide,  observes,  com- 
pares, classifies,  generalizes,  both  in  the  world  of  matter 
and  of  spirit.  The  Semitic  genius  is  narrow  and  intense; 
it  confines  itself  to  what  is  close  at  hand,  and  of  direct 
practical  moment.  Beyond  this  region  it  needs  an  impulse 
from  without  to  awaken  its  innate  energy  and  capacities. 
It  is  normally  stationary  and  unadventurous,  while  the 
Aryan  genius  is  enterprising  and  progressive.  Yet  when 
the  Semitic  mind  is  aroused,  it  can  compete  with,  or  even 
outstrip,  its  rival  in  the  education  of  humanity.  It  has 
done  as  much  for  the  world  through  its  intuitions  and 
postulates  as  the  Aryan  mind  has  achieved  through  reflec- 
tion and  demonstration. 


6  ACHIEVEMENTS   OF   THE   SEMITES  BOOK  I 

§  6.  But  the  student  of  History  will  find  it  more  in- 
structive to  consider  the  results  of  the  co-operation  of  the 
diverse  mental  and  moral  forces  of  these  two  world- 
compelling  races.  The  business  of  civilizing  and  saving 
the  world,  as  far  as  the  merely  human  factors  are  concerned, 
has  been  carried  on  through  the  transfer  of  moral  and 
spiritual  ideas  and  the  arts  of  civilized  life  from  the  one 
race  to  the  other.  In  nearly  everything  vital  to  human 
well-being  the  Semites  were  the  founders  or  forerunners. 
Centuries,  perhaps  millenniums,  before  any  branch  of  the 
Aryan  race  had  emerged  from  primitive  rudeness,  the 
Semitic  Babylonians  were  in  possession  of  the  rudiments 
of  the  practical  and  useful  arts  and  sciences.  Through 
the  progress  of  conquest  westward,  and  still  more  through 
adventures  of  trade,  the  most  important  of  these  attain- 
ments were  indirectly  brought  to  the  receptive  and  pro- 
gressive Aryans  of  the  Mediterranean  coast-lands  and 
islands,  with  the  result  that  they  were  developed  and 
applied  far  beyond  the  range  to  which  they  were  ever 
extended  in  the  region  of  their  origination.  Again, 
while  it  is  undeniable  that  the  faculty  of  organization  on 
a  large  scale  must  be  denied  to  the  political  genius  of  the 
Semitic  race,  it  is  also  true  that  the  first  example  given 
to  the  world  of  an  extensive  stable  system  of  government 
was  supplied  by  the  Semites  of  Assyria,  and  that  this 
furnished  to  the  Aryan  Persians  the  model  for  the  empire 
of  Cyrus  and  Darius,  which  in  its  turn  was  imitated  in 
the  Macedonian  and  Roman  world-subduing  and  world- 
restraining  monarchies.  Thus  that  type  of  government 
was  furnished  by  which  alone,  during  our  long  semi- 
barbaric  mundane  era,  society  could  be  kept  together  and 
security  afforded  against  all  rapine  and  oppression,  except, 
indeed,  those  of  the  rulers  themselves.  Here  again  we 
see  the  characteristic  limitation  of  Semitism.  The  state 
founded  by  the  Semites  did  not  pass  beyond  the  stage 
of  military  guardianship  when  it  left  the  hands  of  its 
devisers.  The  freer  forms  of  self-governing  commu- 


CH.  I,  §  8  THEIR   GIFT   OF   RELIGION  7 

nities  were  wrought  out  by  the   political  genius  of  the 
Aryans. 

§  7.  But  the  greatest  boon  which  any  race  or  people 
ever  conferred  upon  -humanity,  was  that  of  j-eligious 
truth  and  freedom,  and  this  was  the  gift  of  the  Hebrews 
of  Palestine.  Yet  not  by  them  as  a  race  has  it  been  or  is 
it  now  being  converted  to  the  uses  of  the  world.  While 
the  unique  national  career  and  institutions  of  Israel  fitted 
that  single  people  to  be  the  depositaries  of  saving  truth 
and  knowledge,  it  was  the  civilizing  genius  of  one  branch 
of  the  Aryan  race  and  the  political  supremacy  of  another, 
which  prepared  the  wider  and  deeper  channels  through 
which  the  divinely  conferred  endowment  was  conveyed  to 
the  kindreds  and  peoples  of  mankind.  And  when  the 
worship  of  Jehovah,  established  among  one  people  of  the 
earth  in  place  of  the  discarded  national  and  local  divini- 
ties, had  been  bereft  of  its  potency  and  vitality;  and  when 
the  revelation,  renewed  and  transfigured  before  the  eyes 
of  men  in  an  image  of  divine  self-sacrifice,  had  failed 
of  general  recognition  and  adoption  in  the  Messiah's  own 
community,  it  was  at  length  turned  over  to  the  Gentile 
Aryans,  who  welcomed  it  and  gave  it  a  currency  which 
has  outrun  the  march  of  civilization,  overstepped  all  geo- 
graphical and  political  boundaries,  and  overleaped  all 
social  and  prescriptive  barriers. 

§  8.  Yet  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  was  a  Semite  of 
the  Semites ;  and  he  with  his  helpers,  in  breaking  through 
the  limitations  of  Judaism,  were  but  striving  after  the 
ideal  of  universal  regeneration  set  before  them  by  the 
divine  Founder  of  the  one  religion  of  humanity,  himself 
a  Semite.  Incontestably  the  best  thoughts  and  principles 
-  the  most  profound,  the  most  propulsive,  the  most  po- 
tential —  that  men  have  ever  cherished,  have  been  con- 
ceived and  elaborated  in  Semitic  minds.  Nay,  more :  the 
world  has  not  yet  fathomed  the  depths  of  these  thoughts, 
nor  fully  tested  the  applicability  of  these  principles  to  the 
social  and  personal  needs  of  any  generation  of  men.  It 


8  DISTINCTIONS   BETWEEN   THE   SEMITES         BOOK  I 

is,  moreover,  the  obvious  truth  that  after  the  impulse 
given  by  the  Oriental  pioneers  of  Christianity  had  ex- 
hausted itself,  the  Western  champions  of  the  faith, 
through  the  Aryan  tendency  to  speculation,  through  lack 
of  sure  moral  insight  and  sympathy,  as  well  as  through 
ignorance  of  Semitic  modes  of  thought  and  expression, 
allowed  the  spirit  and  essence  of  the  saving  truth  to  evap- 
orate in  metaplrysical  subtleties,  from  whose  beclouding 
and  distracting  influence  we  are  only  in  the  present  age 
beginning  to  free  ourselves,  as  we  are  learning  to  read 
aright  the  words  of  Jesus  and  Paul  and  John  with  the 
newly  awakened  historical  sense. 

§  9.  To  understand  anything,  we  must  know  its  his- 
tory. We  shall  misjudge  all  institutions,  and  fail  to 
Appreciate  all  commanding  ideas,  unless  we  learn  with 
approximate  accuracy  how  they  were  founded,  how  they 
were  evolved  in  the  thoughts,  and  how  they  were  wrought 
out  in  the  lives  of  men.  In  tracing  the  development  of 
our  intellectual  and  spiritual  inheritance  from  the  Semites, 
we  must  make  many  necessary  distinctions.  We  must 
first  and  fundamentally  distinguish  between  Northern 
and  Southern  Semites  (§  17  ff.);  for  the  r61e  of  the  latter, 
important  as  it  has  been  in  the  mental  and  religious 
development  as  well  as  in  the  political  fortunes  of  the 
Eastern  world,  was  played  long  after  the  decisive  contri- 
bution had  been  made  by  the  former  to  the  controlling 
forces  in  human  society.  And  when  we  have  isolated  the 
Northern  Semites,  and  observed  their  geographical  dis- 
tribution and  the  historical  development  of  their  several 
divisions,  we  have  again  to  single  out  one  small  sub- 
division from  all  others,  and  devote  special  attention  to 
its  fortunes  and  achievements.  This  we  have  to  do, 
unless  we  violate  all  the  canons  of  historical  proportion ; 
for  in  the  history  of  the  petty  Hebrew  community  we  have 
the  unique  phenomenon  presented  to  us  of  one  of  the  most 
feeble  of  all  peoples  revolutionizing  the  beliefs  and  cus- 
toms of  the  world,  and  what  is  more  wonderful  still, 


CH.  I,  §  10      HEBREWS   AND   ALLIED   COMMUNITIES  9 

contributing  most  generously  and  signally  to  these  trans- 
forming and  renovating  influences  in  proportion  as  its  own 
political  autonomy  approached  extinction.  Accordingly, 
in  treating  of  the  doings  and  the  influence  of  the  Semitic 
race,  we  must  view  their  history  in  long  perspective ;  we 
must  keep  in  a  relatively  subordinate  place  the  parts, 
important  as  these  undoubtedly  were,  played  by  some  of 
the  kindred  communities  in  political  progress,  in  com- 
mercial enterprise,  and  in  the  arts  of  civilized  life,  and, 
from  the  standpoint  of  permanent  results,  give  the  central 
and  controlling  place  to  the  annals  and  achievements  of 
Israel.  As  we  look  back  in  the  light  of  these  later  ages 
upon  the  whole  evolution  of  Semitic  life  and  thought,  we 
feel  that  we  can  do  justice  to  the  various  factors  and  pro- 
ducts of  that  history  only  by  acknowledging  the  suprem- 
acy of  the  moral  order  in  human  affairs,  and  vindicating 
for  the  people  of  ancient  Palestine  the  place  which  Provi- 
dence has  assigned  them  as  the  principal  agents  in  secur- 
ing for  it  recognition  and  validity  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth. 

§  10.  Yet  we  cannot  disassociate  from  the  history  of 
Israel  the  influence  of  the  surrounding  and  especially  that 
of  the  allied  communities.  Unequalled  as  was  the  ser- 
vice rendered  by  Israel  to  mankind,  and  altogether  unique 
as  was  its  inner  moral  and  spiritual  history,  we  find  that 
its  social  and  political  relations  were  largely  determined 
by  its  place  and  function  as  a  member  of  a  larger  aggre- 
gation of  peoples.  Indeed,  when  we  regard  the  r61e  as- 
sighecrby  Providence  to  the  Semitic  race  in  the  ancient 
world,  it  seems  to  us  to  be  a  part  of  this  very  significance 
attaching  to  the  mission  of  the  Hebrews  that  it  belonged 
to  that  race  and  shared  its  leading  mental  and  moral  char- 
acteristics. Being  permitted  for  thousands  of  years  to 
develop  their  institutions  and  work  their  will  in  a  well- 
defined  and  spacious  region  with  little  interruption  from 
any  outside  race,  it  was  made  possible  for  these  Northern 
Semites  to  elaborate  and  perfect  the  products  of  their 


10  ONE-SIDED   VIEWS   OF   SEMITIC   HISTORY       BOOK  I 

peculiar  genius  in  the  political,  social,  moral,  and  relig- 
ious spheres.  No  other  race  of  men  has  had  a  place,  or 
scope,  or  term  erf  duration  so  favourable  for  the  evolution 
of  its  inherent  capacities.  Now  the  fortunes  of  the 
Hebrews  being  involved  in  the  long  and  constant  action 
and  interaction  of  the  Semitic  communities,  it  is  mani- 
festly the  duty  of  the  historian  to  duly  subordinate  secon- 
dary motives  and  issues  to  those  which  are  admitted  to  be 
primary,  and  at  the  same  time  to  carefully  indicate  how 
all  influential  elements  co-operated  to  the  final  resultant. 
That  is  to  say,  it  is  impossible  to  treat  the  history  of 
Israel  by  itself  alone,  or  with  a  mere  incidental  reference 
to  the  actions  and  policy  of  neighbouring  nations  where 
these  were  of  decisive  moment.  For  the  actions  and  the 
policy  of  these  nationalities  also  had  their  roots  in  histori- 
cal causes  which  require  to  be  set  forth  with  commensu- 
rate fulness  and  clearness. 

§  11.  These  views  as  to  the  relative  interest  and  impor- 
tance attaching  to  the  various  peoples  of  the  ancient 
East,  and  the  necessity  of  embracing  all  the  Semitic 
communities  in  a  larger  historical  unity,  would  seem  to  be 
self-evident.  Yet  they  need  to  be  stated  and  enforced 
with  some  emphasis  and  particularity,  since  it  has  been 
the  almost  uniform  practice  of  writers  on  Oriental  his- 
tory to  treat  of  each  of  the  ruling  peoples  separately  with- 
out much  regard  to  the  vitally  close  relations  that  have 
subsisted  between  them.  This  defective  method  of  treat- 
ment has  especially  characterized  attempts  to  relate  the 
fortunes  of  the  people  of  Israel.  Two  circumstances 
perhaps  mainly  account  for  the  fact.  The  one  is  that 
the  Bible,  which  narrates  the  progress  and  triumph  of  the 
religion  of  Israel,  is  supposed  to  concern  itself  exclu- 
sively with  that  people.  The  other  is  the  scantiness  of 
our  information  as  to  communities  other  than  the  Hebrew 
of  which  students  long  had  to  complain.  A  better  under- 
standing of  the  aim  and  character  of  the  compositions  that 
make  up  the  Bible,  along  with  a  more  liberal  view  of 


Cii.  I,  §  12      DEFECTS   IN   THE   ORIGINAL   SOURCES  11 

its  relations  to  general  history,  helps  to  invalidate  the 
former  prejudice;  while  the  latter  disability  has  been 
largely  removed  by  the  monumental  discoveries  of  recent 
times. 

§  12.  Our  task  then  is  to  narrate  the  ancient  history  of 
the  Xorth- Semitic  peoples  in  its  bearing  upon  the  history 
of  Israel  which  it  includes  and  involves.  The  materials 
for  such  a  history  are  mainly  the  literary  records  and  mon- 
umental remains  generally  of  the  Semitic  peoples  them- 
selves. What  comes  from  outside  sources  is  only  occa- 
sionally of  first-rate  importance,  though  always  rightly 
claiming  the  attention  of  the  student.  In  utilizing  these 
authorities  there  are  two  occasions  of  embarrassment.  In 
the  first  place,  there  are  large  tracts  of  time  during  which 
events  must  have  occurred  of  great  historical  significance, 
but  of  which  we  have  no  direct  account.  The  narrative 
must  therefore  at  best  be  broken  and  incomplete,  espec- 
ially in  the  portion  relating  to  the  earliest  ages.  In  the 
second  place,  the  character  of  the  greater  portion  of  the 
records  themselves  is  such  as  to  make  the  writing  of 
Semitic  history,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  term,  pecul- 
iarly difficult.  The  Semitic  historiographers  were,  for 
the  most  part,  compilers  from  the  records  of  court  annal- 
ists or  chroniclers.  These  official  scribes  narrated  merely 
the  deeds  of  the  rulers  wKom  they  respectively  served,  and 
it  was  not  their  custom  to  go  outside  of  traditional  and 
conventional  limits.  If  they  commemorated  adequately 
the  achievements  of  their  royal  patrons,  they  were  con- 
sidered to  acquit  themselves  of  their  duty.  For  informa- 
tion as  to  the  condition  and  progress  of  the  people  at 
large,  we  are  left  to  incidental  statements  connected  with 
the  beneficence  or  public  spirit  of  the  kings,  to  the  testi- 
mony, when  such  is  at  hand,  of  contemporary  monuments 
of  art  or  practical  skill,  or  to  records  of  legal  or  business 
transactions.  Of  international  relations  and  complica- 
tions, we  learn  only  that  the  powers  concerned  went  to 
war  or  made  treaties ;  and  we  are  told  nothing  as  to  the 


12  HEBREW   HISTORICAL   RECORDS  BOOK  I 

motives  which  in  any  given  case  prompted  the  action. 
To  a  large  extent  the  same  characteristics  are  exhibited 
in  the  Hebrew  historical  books.  These  compilations  are, 
indeed,  superior  as  sources  for  constructive  narrative  to 
the  annals  of  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  kings,  in  that, 
for  example,  they  are  framed  upon  a  fixed  plan  with 
a  definite  purpose.  Yet  they  are  often  only  slightly 
available  for  the  details  of  important  epochs,  inasmuch  as 
their  aim  is  to  mark  the  stages  of  progress  of  the  theo- 
cratic system  by  indicating  sharply  the  critical  periods, 
and  by  illustrating  fully  the  lives  and  characters  of  the 
personages  who  were  the  main  instruments  in  preparing 
the  way  of  Jehovah,  as  they  determined  the  attitude  of  the 
nation  towards  him  and  his  message  and  messengers.  In 
other  words,  the  so-called  Bible  histories  devote  them- 
selves rather  to  commemorating  an  idea  than  to  sketching 
the  rise,  development,  and  decline  of  a  people  or.  nation. 
The  invaluable  information  which  we  do  gain  from  them 
as  to  the  current  of  national  sentiment  among  the  Hebrews, 
and  the  determining  features  of  their  political  and  social 
life,  comes  to  us  rather  as  the  setting  and  framework  of  a 
picture  than  as  the  text  which  describes  and  explains  it. 
Accordingly,  while  each  species  of  historical  record,  of 
higher  or  lower  order,  subserves  the  end  for  which  it  was 
designed,  none  of  them,  nor  even  all  taken  together, 
supply  the  need  we  feel  of  fuller  light  upon  the  long  and 
involved  processes  of  national  and  social  development 
which  make  up  the  story  of  the  struggles  and  achieve- 
ments of  the  Semitic  peoples.  Often,  indeed,  we  have  to 
lament  that  we  must  grope  uncertainly  in  our  search  for 
the  causes  of  important  movements,  and  some  of  the  most 
impressive  historical  phenomena  known  to  men  awaken 
our  interest  and  at  the  same  time  refuse  to  us  all  but  the 
most  meagre  opportunity  of  gratifying  it.  The  progress 
of  human  action  seems  often  to  be  like  a  river  flowing 
underground,  the  greatness  of  whose  volume  and  the 
swiftness  of  whose  current  are  attested  to  us  only  by  the 


CH.  I,  §  13        GENIUS  AND  SCOPE   OF  PROPHECY  13 

murmurs  that  reach  us  from  subterranean  depths  laid  open 
here  and  there,  and  by  the  feeble  glimpses  which  the  light 
thus  admitted  affords  to  our  prying  inspection ;  but  near 
the  end  of  its  course  it  bursts  suddenly  upon  our  view, 
bringing  to  the  upper  day  the  whole  of  its  gathered  waters 
that  had  been  swollen  continually  by  rill  and  fountain 
supplying  it  unseen  and  in  silence. 

§  13.  The  various  annals  and  chronicles  and  monu- 
mental remains  of  the  Semitic  race  are  thus  inadequate  to 
the  delineation  of  its  history.  But  there  has  been  vouch- 
safed to  us  in  a  portion  of  the  literature  of  Israel,  for  the 
most  important  periods  of  that  history,  a  commentary 
which  goes  far  to  supply  the  deficiency.  Hebrew  proph- 
ecy is  not  merely  the  illuminator  of  Hebrew  history 
alone.  It  takes  the  whole  Semitic  realm  for  its  province 
as  being  conjoined  with  Israel  in  providential  destiny. 
Its  torch  even  sends  out  a  light  here  and  there  over  the 
greater  world  of  humanity  —  a  beam  in  darkness  which 
has  grown  to  be  a  light  unto  the  Gentiles,  the  harbinger 
of  him  who  was  to  come  as  the  Light  of  the  World.  We 
speak  of  the  incapacity  of  the  Semitic  mind  for  philo- 
sophic historical  composition,  and  that  with  a  large  meas- 
ure of  justice.  But  what  Prophecy  has  brought  to  the 
elucidation  of  contemporary  history,  besides  the  supple- 
menting of  its  materials,  surpasses  in  depth  of  insight  and 
breadth  of  view  and  keenness  of  sympathy  and  height 
of  idealizing  conception,  anything  which  in  any  age  "the 
supreme  Caucasian  mind "  has  contributed  to  the  moral 
interpretation  of  human  actions  or  the  direction  and  en- 
couragement of  human  endeavour.  How  differently  the 
philosophical  historian  and  the  Hebrew  prophet  approach 
and  interpret  the  problems  of  individual  and  national  life ! 
Speculation,  combination,  rationalizing  construction,  are 
the  obvious  instruments  of  the  one.  The  other  seems  to 
be  independent  of  method.  The  Hebrew  prophetic  mind 
ignores  logic ;  it  even  disdains  speculation.  It  does  not 
infer;  it  simply  seems  to  see.  It  does  not  walk  from  step 


14  HISTORICAL   VALUE   OF   PROPHECY  BOOK  I 

to  step  of  significant  facts ;  it  flies  to  conclusions  of  which 
no  man  sees  the  antecedent  stages.  It  is  like  one  of  its 
own  heroes  when  it  describes  him  as  moving  at  his  ease 
in  a  course  "which  he  does  not  traverse  with  his  feet." 
It  bridges  over  with  the  certitude  of  faith  the  interval 
between  the  present  struggle  and  doubt  and  the  future 
assured  triumph.  It  deals  only  with  subjective  certain- 
ties, which  the  slow  fulfilment  of  history  makes  object- 
ively real.  It  idealizes  the  possibilities  of  humanity,  and 
thus  helps  to  make  them  practically  true.  It  promises 
good,  and  thus  helps  to  bring  it  within  the  reach  of  men. 
It  assumes  eternal  principles  of  right,  and  thus  tends  to 
realize  them  in  human  character  and  conduct.  In  its 
flight  over  nations  and  communities,  it  bears  a  message 
" knit  below  the  wild  pulsation  of  its  wings";  and  what 
it  tells  us  is  that  the  great  motives  urging  on  the  forces 
of  human  history  are  Truth  and  Freedom. 

§  14.  Thus  we  shall  do  well  to  co-ordinate  and  combine 
the  Hebrew  prophetical  literature  with  the  surviving 
chronicles  of  actual  events  in  weaving  the  story  of  ancient 
Israel  and  its  environments  of  races  and  nations.  This 
we  must  do,  in  the  first  instance,  because  Prophecy 
demonstrates  how  these  controlling  motives  of  truth  and 
freedom,  and  the  eternal  unchangeable  moral  forces  of  the 
divine  government,  were  most  signally  illustrated  and 
justified  in  that  chequered  and  many-sided  history.  But 
we  shall  also  find  that  the  writings  of  the  Prophets  of 
Israel  are  a  depository  of  the  facts  of  national  and  social 
life,  more  complete  and  more  pertinent  to  the  uses  of  the 
historian  than  those  contained  in  that  portion  of  the  Bib- 
lical literature  usually  called  historical.  With  regard  to 
transactions  of  great  national  moment,  such  as  alliances 
or  wars  with  foreign  powers,  the  prophets,  it  is  true,  do 
not  detail  the  preliminary  actions,  or  even  as  a  rule  for- 
mally indicate  the  determining  political  causes.  Yet 
their  knowledge  of  the  affairs  and  circumstances,  both  of 
their  own  and  of  the  neighbouring  countries,  is  so  exten- 


CH.  I,  §  15    CHARACTER  AND  SCOPE  OF  THE  INQUIRY  15 

sive  and  accurate,  and  their  interest  in  the  politics  of  their 
time  so  intense,  that  in  their  treatment  of  the  moral  and 
spiritual  problems  of  Israel,  they  seldom  fail  by  allusion 
or  direct  reference  to  throw  welcome  light  upon  the  whole 
international  situation.  We  can  also  infer  much  of  the 
domestic  policy  of  the  rulers  of  Israel  from  the  condition 
of  the  country,  as  described  by  the  Prophets  in  their  de- 
mands for  moral,  social,  and  religious  reform.  So  fully 
did  their  ministry  appropriate  this  wide  and  diversified 
field  of  sacred  and  secular  affairs  that  the  picture  they 
have  left  us  of  the  condition  of  their  country  and  its 
people  is  unsurpassed  in  any  literature  for  its  keenness 
of  appreciation  and  accuracy  of  delineation.  They  have, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  given  a  very  material  contribution 
to  our  knowledge  of  the  international  relations  of  the 
ancient  peoples  of  Western  Asia,  and  the  essential  feat- 
ures and  tendencies  of  their  political  systems  —  and  all 
in  subordinate  yet  vital  association  with  the  paramount 
issue,  the  fate  of  the  one  true  religion,  as  it  was  involved 
in  the  struggle  of  its  votaries  with  the  worldly  forces, 
whether  of  local  or  imperial  magnitude,  which  were 
arrayed  against  them.  They  have  no  parallel  in  history; 
they  have  themselves  created  the  category  and  the  func- 
tion of  Prophet.  They  were  at  once  men  of  thought  and^ 
men  of  action,  keen  and  accurate  observers,  statesmen  and 
publicists,  social  reformers,  lofty  moralists,  leal-hearted 
patriots.  The  unfolding  of  our  history  will  show  that  Old 
Testament  Prophecy,  as  the  forerunner  and  interpreter  of 
History,  performs  services  as  signal  and  as  important  in 
its  sphere  as  that  rendered  by  it  in  ministering  to  the 
spiritual  needs  of  men. 

§  15.  These  remarks  may  serve  to  explain  the  title 
given  to  the  present  essay,  and  at  the  same  time  to  indi- 
cate what  the  general  character  and  scope  of  our  inquiry 
ought  to  be.  It  will  be  proper  to  outline  the  earlier  his- 
tory of  the  several  kindred  communities  which  influenced 
most  materially  the  fortunes  of  Israel,  as  well  as  to  trace 


16  OUK  SPIRIT  AND  ATTITUDE  AS  STUDENTS       BOOK  I 

the  growth  of  the  Hebrew  people  itself,  up  to  the  stage 
at  which  the  determining  national  factors  became  so  closely 
interrelated  as  to  make  it  possible  to  weave  the  record 
into  one  connected  story.  The  narrative  will  then  be 
continued  to  the  catastrophe  which  extinguished  the 
ancient  Semitic  regime,  brought  the  Aryans  to  the  front 
in  Oriental  affairs,  and  started  the  denationalized  Juclseans 
upon  a  new  political  and  religious  career.  With  the 
direct  consequences  of  this  revolution  the  "  History  and 
Prophecy "  of  the  Old  Testament  come  to  a  close,  and 
here  the  "  Monuments  "  of  the  political  and  religious  his- 
tory of  the  ruling  Semitic  monarchies,  which  form  our 
chief  source  of  information  outside  of  the  Biblical  records, 
also  cease  to  tell  their  story. 

§  16.  For  properly  enjoying  as  well  as  utilizing  the 
historical  study  which  I  have  just  outlined,  some  special 
preparation  has  been  assumed  to  be  necessary.  Even  for 
the  appreciation  of  the  Old  Testament  itself,  which  is  the 
main  object  of  our  interest  and  research,  we  shall  find  that 
the  point  of  view  of  the  modern  Bible  reader  must  be 
changed.  Our  purpose  is  to  follow  the  progress  of  events 
long  gone  by,  and  the  operation  of  providential  causes 
within  a  sphere  of  action  foreign  in  many  essential  re- 
spects to  what  we  occupy  and  observe  in  these  later  times 
and  under  AArestern  skies.  We  must  learn  to  look  at  all 
events,  and  at  all  social,  political,  and  even  religious  con- 
ditions, with  the  eyes  of  contemporaries  and  in  the  spirit 
of  the  ancient  historians  and  prophets  themselves.  To 
learn  to  view  these  things  from  the  inside,  and  not  from 
the  outside,  is  not  an  easy  task  for  any  of  us ;  but  it  is 
indispensable  for  intelligent  insight,  true  historical  per- 
spective, and  just  and  sober  judgment.  The  first  thing 
then  to  be  done  is  to  get  a  satisfactor}*-  knowledge,  let  us 
say,  of  such  external  matters  as  those  with  which  the 
Bible  concerns  itself  —  such  a  knowledge  of  the  physical 
aspect,  social  institutions,  political  systems,  and  relig- 
ious customs  of  the  nations  kindred  to  Israel  as  an  intel- 


CH.  I,  §  16  THE   METHOD   OF   INQUIRY  17 

ligent  contemporary  of  the  Hebrew  prophets  possessed. 
For  example,  the  prophets  concern  themselves  vastly  with 
the  great  empires  beyond  the  River.  It  will  naturally, 
then,  be  useful  for  us  to  get  some  accurate  notion  of  the 
genius  and  character  of  these  kingdoms  and  peoples ;  of 
their  political  tendencies  and  aims,  whose  operations  were 
of  such  vital  consequence  to  Israel  and  the  world;  of  their 
religion,  to  which  manifold  reference  is  made  in  the  Bible ; 
of  their  intellectual  and  moral  features  as  being  the  most 
gifted  and  influential  of  the  kindred  of  Israel,  the  creators 
of  science,  and  the  conquerors  and  rulers  of  Western 
Asia.  So  also  must  we  deal  with  the  other  tribes  and 
kingdoms  of  less  relative  importance  which  were  involved 
in  the  process  of  the  development  of  Israel,  as  they  grew 
into  competency  for  the  functions  assigned  them  when 
God  "determined  their  appointed  seasons  and  the  bounds 
of  their  habitation."  Hence  it  will  be  profitable  for  us, 
from  the  Biblical  as  well  as  from  the  broadly  human  stand- 
point, to  take,  first  of  all,  a  rapid  glance  at  the  plrysical 
features  of  the  lands  with  which  the  Bible  and  the  monu- 
ments have  to  do  in  common,  and  the  leading  characteris- 
tics of  their  peoples,  as  members  of  the  great  Semitic 
family,  and  as  factors  in  the  political,  social,  and  religious 
history  of  the  ancient  East. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE   NORTH-SEMITIC   TERRITORY  AND   ITS  INHABITANTS 

§  17.  THAT  portion  of  Western  Asia  with  which  our 
present  inquiry  chiefly  concerns  itself  is  included  in  a 
somewhat  crescent-shaped  territory  stretching  northwest- 
ward from  the  Persian  Gulf,  skirting  in  its  whole  extent 
the  great  Syro-Arabian  desert,  terminating  on  the  fron- 
tiers of  Egypt,  and  bisected  by  the  Great  River,  the  river 
Euphrates  (§  71  f.).  In  modern  Turkey,  of  which  it  now 
forms  a  part,  it  is  not  by  any  means  the  most  important 
section,  though  in  pre-Turkish  times  it  was  the  most 
populous  and  influential  portion  of  the  whole  area  at 
present  embraced  under  that  dominion.  It  corresponds 
very  nearly  to  the  territory  included  in  the  modern  prov- 
inces (vilayets)  of  Baghdad,  Mosul,  Diarbekr,  Aleppo, 
Damascus,  Lebanon,  and  Jerusalem,  comprising  about 
220,000  square  miles,  or  less  than  one-third  of  the  Sul- 
tan's Asiatic  possessions  —  an  area  rather  larger  than  Ger- 
many, nearly  twice  as  large  as  Italy,  or  three  times  as 
large  as  England.  Leaving  out  of  view  the  small  dis- 
trict of  Palestine  and  the  Syrian  highlands  stretching 
almost  unbrokenly  northward  to  meet  the  range  of  Taurus, 
nearly  all  of  this  territory  consists  of  level  country  re- 
claimed from  the  desert,  through  the  fertilizing  influence 
of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  or  their  tributaries.  On  the 
north  lay  the  broken  mountain-chains,  the  valleys  and 
plateaus  of  Cappadocia  and  Armenia,  in  ancient  times 
rarely,  and  then  only  under  precarious  compulsion,  brought 
into  political  union  with  the  dominant  race  controlling  the 

18 


CH.  II,  §  19        COMMUNITIES  OF  THE   SEMITES  19 

plain.  On  the  east  were  the  mountains  of  Media  and 
Elam ;  on  the  south  the  illimitable  desert.  On  the  west 
was  the  Great  Sea;  and  where  the  western  and  northern 
boundaries  approach,  lay  the  huge  but  not  impassable 
barrier  of  the  Taurus  range,  with  all  of  Asia  Minor 
behind  it. 

§  18.  The  most  comprehensive  fact  to  be  noted  about 
this  territory  has  been  already  suggested,  that  it  was  the 
home  of  the  leading  Semitic  communities  and  the  scene 
of  their  activity  during  by  far  the  largest  part  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  civilized  world.  The  following  is  a  scheme  of 
the  divisions  of  the  Semitic  race.  It  is  based  partly  upon 
the  evidence  afforded  by  linguistic  affinity,  and  partly 
upon  geographical  and  historical  distribution. 

A:   NORTHERN  SEMITES 

ia.  Old  Babylonian 
b.  Assyrian 
c.  Chaldsean 

c  a.  Mesopotamian 
II.  ARAJLEAN:      J,  ,    0    . 

(  b.  Syrian 

(a. 

lb. 


,  a.  Canaamtes 
III.  CANAAXITIC  :    •{  ,    ™ 

Phoenicians 


a.  Hebrews 

,  b.  Moabites 
IV.  HEBRAIC  :        <        .  ., 

c.  Ammonites 

d.  Edomites 


B:  SOUTHERN  SEMITES 


I. 

II.  ETHIOPIANS 
III.   ARABS 


§  19.  It  should  be  said  with  regard  to  the  foregoing 
classification,  that  it  has  been  made  as  general  as  possible, 
since  it  is  a  matter  of  great  difficulty  to  make  clear-cut 


20  UNCERTAIN   DIVISIONS  BOOK  I 

divisions  on  an  exact  ethnological  basis.  If  a  linguistic 
classification 1  were  attempted,  a  scheme  largely  different 
would  have  to  be  exhibited,  since,  in  some  instances,  two 
or  more  distinct  families  came  to  use  in  historical  times 
the  same  language,  without  any  serious  divergence  as  far 
as  the  extant  literary  records  enable  us  to  decide,  and  in 
other  cases  communities  of  the  same  family  learned  to 
employ  idioms  distinct  from  one  another.  Again,  it 
should  be  observed  that  the  mixture  of  races  which  was 
continually  going  on  in  the  Semitic  world  is  not  and 
cannot  be  indicated  by  our  classification.  The  Babylo- 
nians, for  example,  received  a  constant  accession  from  Ara- 
maeans encamped  on  their  borders,  and  even  beyond  the 
Tigris;  but  these,  as  well  as  non-Semitic  elements  from 
the  mountains  and  plains  to  the  east,  they  assimilated  in 
speech  and  customs.  The  same  general  remark  applies 
to  the  Aramaeans  of  Northern  Mesopotamia  and  Syria, 
while  the  peoples  of  Southern  and  Eastern  Palestine,  and 
in  fact  all  the  communities  that  bordered  on  the  Great 
Desert,  from  the  Persian  Gulf  to  the  Mediterranean,  were 
continually  absorbing  individuals  or  tribes  of  Arabian 
stock.  Finally,  it  must  be  remarked  that  in  some  sub- 
divisions it  is  necessary  to  use  a  geographical  instead  of 
a  properly  racial  distinction ;  and  that  is,  of  course,  to  be 
limited  chronologically.  Thus,  for  instance,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  devise  a  single  strictly  ethnological  term  for  the 
two  great  divisions  of  the  AramaBans. 

§  20.  It  is  now  pretty  generally  admitted  that  the  home 
of  the  Semitic  race,  before  its  separation  into  the  histori- 
cal divisions,  was  Northern  Arabia.  Naturally,  it  is 
impossible  to  assign  to  them  any  definite  locality.  In 
fact,  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  a  very  limited  area 
could  have  been  the  dwelling-place  of  any  such  aggrega- 
tion of  kindred  tribes  as  that  from  which  the  Semitic  peo- 
ples were  descended.  The  theory  that  one  small  tribe  or 
family  ever  did  or  could  branch  off  from  the  rest  of  man- 

1  See  Note  1  in  Appendix. 


CH.  II,  §  21        EARLIEST   HOME   OF  THE   SEMITES  21 

kind,  and  start  a  new  community  with  a  new  language 
and  new  customs  and  institutions,  is  untenable.  The 
conditions  which  made  the  beginnings  of  such  an  evolu- 
tion possible  lie  much  further  back  than  the  stage  which 
the  ancestors  of  the  Semites  had  reached  when  they  pos- 
sessed those  elements  of  language,  those  arts  of  life,  and 
the  other  attainments  of  civilization,  which  were  later  held 
by  their  descendants  in  common.  Such  a  stage  of  devel- 
opment belongs  to  the  sphere  of  anthropology  and  pre- 
historic archaeology;  and  it  is  quite  impossible,  as  yet, 
to  conjecture  where  the  savage  progenitors  of  the  Semites 
lived  in  hordes,  without  tribal  distinctions,  at  the  period 
thus  indicated.  When  we  speak  of  the  home  of  the  early 
Semites,  we  must  picture  to  ourselves  a  number  of  closely 
related  tribes  or  clans,  occupying  a  region  covering  thou- 
sands of  square  miles,  having  similar  pursuits,  and  moving 
along  parallel  lines  of  development  by  reason  of  free  inter- 
course with  one  another.  Such  an  hypothesis  is  necessary 
to  explain  both  the  degree  of  culture  which  they  at- 
tained in  common,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  possibility 
of  their  division  into  distinct  families  with  all  their 
historic  differences  of  language,  religion,  and  social  in- 
stitutions. 

§  21.  The  principal  arguments  in  favour  of  the  view  that 
the  Semites  had  their  individual  residence  in  Northern 
Arabia  may  be  properly  enumerated  here.  There  is,  in 
the  first  place,  the  fact  that  the  historical  distribution  of 
the  several  families  is  thus  best  accounted  for,  as  will 
presently  appear.  Secondly,  the  dominant  characteristics 
of  the  ancient  Egyptians  are  generally  admitted  to  indicate 
a  strong  interfusion  of  Semitic  with  African  elements, 
and  as  their  civilization  is  enormously  old,  it  is  to  be  sup- 
posed that  the  immigration  took  place  from  the  region 
which,  as  far  back  as  the  records  of  history  speak,  con- 
stantly supplied  the  Nile  Valley  with  new  settlers;  that 
is,  the  Arabian  desert.  In  the  third  place,  the  perma- 
nent genius  of  the  Semites,  which  disinclined  them  to 


22  DIVISION   OF   THE   TEKRITORY  BOOK  I 

inhabit  or  colonize  extended  mountain  regions,  would  seem 
to  betray  an  inherited  aptitude  for  life  upon  the  plains. 
Finally,  the  nomadic  origin  of  the  Semites  is  attested 
by  words  relating  to  the  life  and  association  of  nomads 
(e.g.  "sheep,"  "shepherd,"  "camel,"  "bow,"  "arrow"), 
which  are  found  in  all  the  dialects  of  the  race,  and  must 
therefore  have  been  used  by  the  common  ancestors  of  all. 
The  only  desert  and  wilderness  land  whose  location  suits 
the  geographical  distribution  of  the  race  is  that  of  North- 
ern Arabia.1 

§  22.  To  the  ancient  Hebrews  and  their  contemporaries 
the  dividing  line  of  the  whole  of  the  North-Sftmitic  region 
was  "  the  great  river,  the  River  Euphrates."  And,  indeed, 
the  course  of  that  stream,  after  leaving  the  mountains, 
formed  not  only  a  natural  means  of  separation  between 
tribes  and  races,  but  also  a  commercial  halting-place,  and 
a  strategic  barrier  of  no  mean  importance.  Another  basis 
of  division,  however,  would  be  physically  as  well  as  politi- 
cally and  ethnographically  more  exact,  the  Euphrates 
playing  in  it  also  a  leading  part.  The  first  or  western 
division  extends  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the  basin  of 
the  Euphrates.  The  second  or  middle  portion  includes  the 
pastoral  lands  between  that  river  and  the  Tigris,  and 
the  trading  stations  and  towns  to  the  north ;  that  is,  Meso- 
potamia proper.  The  third  or  eastern  section  includes 
the  territory  extending  from  the  mountains  of  Kurdistan 
southward  to  the  Persian  Gulf,  including  the  cities  and 
villages  on  both  sides  of  the  Tigris  and  the  Lower  Eu- 
phrates. The  whole  region  may  be  tentatively  said  to 
have  been  appropriated  by  the  several  families  of  North- 
ern Semites  somewhat  as  follows :  — 

§  23.  While  among  the  Southern  Semites  the  various 
Arab  tribes  remained  for  the  most  part  in  their  desert 

1  A  contrary  opinion,  that  the  Semites  came  originally  from  the  high- 
lands of  Central  Asia,  is  maintained  by  Guidi,  de  Goeje,  and  Hommel.  The 
two  leading  theories  are  compared  in  favour  of  Arabia  by  Wright,  Camp. 
Grammar  of  the  Semitic  Languages,  ch.  i ;  cf .  §  105  of  this  work. 


CH.  II,  §  24        BABYLONIANS   AND   CANAANITES  23 

home  for  thousands  of  years  as  obscure  Bedawin,  and  the 
Sabseans  cultivated  the  rich  soil  of  the  southwest  and 
the  southern  coast  of  Arabia,  and  there  developed  cities 
and  a  flourishing  commerce,  and  the  nearly  related  Ethi- 
opians, migrating  across  the  Red  Sea,  slowly  built  up  in 
Abyssinia  an  isolated  civilization  of  their  own,  those 
branches  of  the  race  with  which  we  are  immediately  con- 
cerned, after  a  lengthened  residence  in  common  camping- 
grounds,  moved  northward  and  westward  to  engage  in 
more  important  enterprises.  The  Babylonians,  occupy- 
ing the  region  which  the  Bible  makes  Known  to  us  as  the 
scene  of  man's  creation,  and  which  historical  research  in- 
dicates to  have  been  the  seat  of  the  earliest  civilization, 
made  their  home  on  the  lands  of  the  Lower  Euphrates  and 
Tigris,  converting  them  through  canalization  and  irriga- 
tion into  rich  and  powerful  kingdoms  finally  united  under 
the  rule  of  Babylon.  Before  the  union  was  effected, 
emigrants  from  among  these  Babylonians  settled  along 
the  Middle  Tigris  (§  171),  founded  the  city  of  Asshur, 
and  later  still  the  group  of  cities  known  to  history  as 
Nineveh.  The  Assyrians  then,  after  long  struggles,  rose 
to  pre-eminence  in  Western  Asia,  till  after  centuries  of 
stern  dominion  they  yielded  to  the  new  Babylonian  regime 
founded  by  the  Chaldseans  from  the  shores  of  the  Persian 
Gulf. 

§  24.  The  Canaanites,  debarred  from  the  riches  of  the 
East,  turned  northwestward  at  an  unknown  early  date, 
and  while  some  of  them  occupied  and  cultivated  the  val- 
le}~s  of  Palestine,  others  seized  the  maritime  plain  and  the 
western  slope  of  Lebanon.  On  the  coast  of  the  latter 
region  they  took  advantage  of  the  natural  harbours  wanting 
in  the  former,  and  tried  the  resources  and  possibilities  of 
the  sea.  As  Phoenicians  of  Sidon  and  Tyre,  they  became 
the  great  navigators  and  maritime  traders  for  the  nations, 
and  sent  forth  colonies  over  the  Mediterranean,  which  in 
their  turn  illustrated  the  versatility  of  the  Semitic  genius 
by  grasping  at  and  almost  maintaining  against  the  rising 


24  THE   ARAMAEANS  BOOK  I 

power  of  Rome,  the  supremacy  of  the  new  western  world. 
Their  kindred  in  the  interior  cultivated  the  valleys  and 
mountain-slopes  with  corn  and  the  vine,  and  through  their 
industry  made  of  the  country  "a  land  exuding  milk  and 
honey." 

§  25.  Meanwhile  the  pasture  lands  between  the  Tigris 
and  the  Euphrates  and  between  the  southern  desert  and  the 
northern  mountains  were  gradually  being  occupied  by 
the  Aramaeans,  who  advanced  with  flocks  and  herds  along 
the  Euphrates,  leaving,  however,  encampments  and  even 
large  settlements  on  the  skirts  of  Babylonia  both  to  the 
east  and  to  the  west,  and  some  enterprising  traders  among 
its  heterogeneous  population.  While  the  bulk  of  the 
Aramaeans  adhered  to  the  old  pastoral  life  among  the  good 
grazing  districts  in  the  confines  of  the  desert,  a  large  num- 
ber, favoured  by  their  intermediate  position  between  urban 
and  nomadic  settlements,  addicted  themselves  to  the  car- 
rying trade  between  the  East  and  the  West,  and  as  trav- 
elling merchants  and  negotiators  of  all  sorts  of  exchange, 
played  a  most  important  part  in  the  promotion  of  com- 
merce and  the  extension  of  Babylonian  art  and  science 
westward,  till  it  was  taken  up  by  the  Greeks  and  by  them 
made  available  to  the  progressive  European  world.  In- 
deed, their  position  and  influence  as  land  traders  were 
strikingly  analogous  to  those  of  their  kindred,  the  Phoeni- 
cians, upon  the  sea.  This  remarkable  people,  however, 
never  attained  to  political  autonomy  on  a  large  scale  in 
their  Mesopotamian  home,  to  which  for  long  ages  they 
were  confined.  After  the  decline  of  the  Hettite  princi- 
palities west  of  the  Euphrates  (§  201),  to  which  they 
themselves  largely  contributed,  they  rapidly  spread  in  that 
quarter  also.  They  mingled  with  the  non-Semitic  Het- 
tite inhabitants  of  Carchemish  and  Hamath,  formed  settle- 
ments along  the  slopes  of  Amanus  and  Anti-Lebanon,  and 
created  on  the  northeast  corner  of  Palestine  a  powerful 
state  with  Damascus  as  the  centre,  which  was  long  a  rival 
of  Israel,  and  even  stood  out  against  the  might  of  Assyria. 


CH.  II,  §  26  THE   HEBRAIC   FAMILY  25 

Thus  the  Aramaeans  really  acted  a  more  prominent  politi- 
cal part  to  the  west  than  they  did  to  the  east  of  the 
Euphrates,  and  accordingly  they  have  been  popularly  most 
closely  associated  with  the  name  "Syria."  At  the  same 
time  they  did  not  abandon  their  old  settlements  between 
the  Rivers.  So  it  came  to  pass  that  after  the  decline  of 
the  Hebrew  and  Babylonian  language  and  literature  the 
Aramaic  language  not  only  overspread  the  whole  of  Pales- 
tine, and  invaded  the  Sinaitic  peninsula,  but  in  fact  be- 
came, until  the  Mohammedan  conquest,  the  prevailing 
idiom  of  literary  and  popular  usage  through  the  whole  of 
the  North-Semitic  realm. 

§  26.  As  the  latest  of  the  historical  divisions  of  the 
race  to  form  an  independent  community,  the  Hebraic 
family  made  their  permanent  settlement  in  and  about 
Palestine.  Their  common  ancestors  of  the  family  of 
Terah  emigrated  from  Southern  Babylonia  more  than  two 
thousand  years  before  the  Christian  era.  It  is  highly 
probable  that  they  were  of  Aramrean  stock  (Deut.  xxvi. 
5:  cf.  §  25,  339).  Haran  (Harran),  the  great  commer- 
cial and  religious  gathering  place  of  the  Aramaeans, 
gave  them  temporary  shelter  on  their  route,  and  a  portion 
of  the  clan,  the  family  of  Nahor,  made  their  permanent 
home  among  this  people  of  shepherds  and  traders.  But 
a  land  of  better  promise  called  their  great  leader,  Abra- 
ham, further  west,  and  he  and  his  descendants  lived 
for  centuries  in  Southern  Canaan,  dwelling  still  in  tents 
as  pilgrims  and  strangers.  After  a  time  Moab  and 
Ammon  secured  a  precarious  footing  in  the  valleys  and 
uplands  east  of  the  Jordan,  where  they  maintained  a 
struggle  for  existence  with  the  non-Semitic  Amorites,  a 
struggle  only  decided  finally  in  their  favour  through  the 
interposition  of  their  enterprising  kindred,  the  men  of 
Israel,  who  then  shared  with  them  the  disputed  territory. 
Edom  contented  himself  with  a  roving  frontier  life  on 
the  southern  border  of  Canaan.  His  brethren  of  Israel, 
after  a  unique  and  chequered  history,  including  a  long 


26  THE    HEBREWS   IN   CANAAN  BOOK  I 

residence  in  Egypt  and  the  displacement  of  the  Amorites 
from  their  possessions  east  of  the  Jordan,  at  length  made 
Central  Palestine  also  securely  their  own,  and  the  seat  of 
most  of  their  tribal  settlements.  All  of  the  immigrants 
had  early  adopted  "the  language  of  Canaan,"  known  in 
later  times  as  "Hebrew."  Before,  and  to  a  less  extent 
after,  its  final  establishment  in  Canaan,  there  had  been 
absorbed  by  Israel  large  elements  of  Arabic  derivation,  and 
there  was  undoubtedly  also  commingling  of  certain  sec- 
tions of  the  immigrants  with  their  Canaanitic  predeces- 
sors. These  facts,  taken  in  connection  with  the  Aramaic 
original  of  the  clan,  and  its  probable  admixture  with 
Babylonian  elements  during  its  residence  on  the  Lower 
Euphrates,  prevent  us,  on  the  one  hand,  from  classing  the 
Hebrews  definitely  with  any  single  one  of  the  other  great 
divisions,  and  suggest  to  us  that  their  kinship  with  all  of 
them  may  help  to  account  for  their  marvellous  "  race " 
qualities,  as  well  as  for  the  unmatched  intellectual  and 
moral  force  of  their  choicest  representatives. 


CHAPTER   III 

CONSTITUTION   AND   CHARACTER   OF    THE  NORTH-SEMITIC 
COMMUNITIES 

§  27.  WE  shall  now  proceed  to  take  a  glance  at  the 
political  organization  of  this  North-Semitic  country  dur- 
ing the  times  for  which  the  most  adequate  material  for 
such  a  general  survey  is  accessible.  The  first  thing  to  be 
noticed  is  the  contrast  afforded  by  this  region  between  its 
condition  in  these  early  ages  and  its  present  state.  The 
popular  saying  that  everything  in  the  East  is  unchange- 
able is  a  useful  statement  to  work  with  when  dealing  with 
certain  phases  of  the  life  and  manners  of  Semitic  peoples 
in  their  immemorial  habitats ;  but  it  is  as  untrue  of  them 
as  it  is  of  the  rest  of  the  world  with  application  to  politi- 
cal fortune  and  social  advancement.  What  is  most 
remarkable  in  the  case  of  this  region  is  that  the  contrast 
should  be  so  decidedly  unfavourable  to  the  present.  Not 
in  Palestine  alone,  but  in  the  whole  region  eastward  to 
the  Persian  Empire  and  Gulf,  the  people  thirty  centuries 
ago  were  far  more  numerous  and  prosperous  than  are  the 
inhabitants  of  the  same  territory  at  the  present  day.  For 
its  present  condition  it  is  sufficient  to  be  reminded  that 
the  whole  country  is  under  the  sway  of  the  Osmanli,  and 
that  their  governmental  system  may  be  summarized  nega- 
tively, at  least,  as  one  under  which  the  rule  of  official 
neglect  and  indifference  is  only  broken  in  favour  of  official 
rapacity  and  extortion.  Immense  tracts  of  the  most 
fertile  soil  on  the  globe,  of  which  three  thousand  years 
ago  "every  rood  of  ground  maintained  its  man,"  are  now 
abandoned  to  wild  beasts  or  roving  Bedawin.  Agricul- 

27 


28  MARKS   OF   ANCIENT   PROSPERITY  BOOK  I 

ture,  the  basis  of  a  people's  prosperity,  is  through  most  of 
its  area  in  a  more  backward  condition,  even  as  regards 
mechanical  appliances,  than  it  was  in  those  remote  ages. 
Now  the  only  signs  of  prosperity  are  to  be  seen  among 
the  merchants  of  a  few  of  the  cities,  or  the  slave-dealers, 
or  the  money-lenders,  or  the  tax-gatherers  and  officials 
generally.  The  population  of  the  region  with  which  we 
are  concerned  is  at  present  under  nine  millions,  or  about 
forty  inhabitants  to  the  square  mile.  The  districts  now 
most  thickly  peopled  —  Lebanon,  Damascus,  and  Jerusa- 
lem, a  territory  exceeding  the  widest  limits  of  ancient 
Palestine  —  contain  a  population  of  about  sixty  to  the 
square  mile,  certainly  less  than  half  the  number  that 
lived  in  the  same  area  in  the  days  of  Hiram  and  Solomon 
or  in  those  of  Jeroboam  II,  and  Uzziah.  The  great  prov- 
ince of  Baghdad,  with  its  four  millions  and  three-quarters 
of  inhabitants,  was  far  surpassed  in  population  by  the 
Babylonia  of  Nebuchadrezzar  alone.  The  total  of  nine 
millions  must  have  been  vastly  exceeded  any  time  between 
the  ninth  and  seventh  centuries  B.C.  merely  by  the  popu- 
lation of  the  chief  cities,  of  the  greatest  of  which  no  ves- 
tige remains  above  the  surface  of  the  soil,  and  of  many 
of  which  the  very  site  is  now  unknown.  The  Assyrian 
annals,  in  matters  of  numeration  vastly  more  reliable  than 
the  modern  official  statistics,  in  recounting  the  details  of 
tribute  paid  by  comparatively  insignificant  communities, 
indicate  the  possession  of  an  amount  of  wealth  and  a 
degree  of  advancement  in  the  industrial  and  aesthetic  arts, 
which  to  the  present  inhabitants  of  the  same  districts 
would  seem  like  fictions  of  an  Eastern  story-teller;  and 
in  many  cases  they  speak  of  an  abundance  of  cereal 
productions  such  as  would  be  sufficient  to  feed  half  a 
Turkish  province  of  the  nineteenth  century.  True,  most 
of  these  localities  suffered  from  frequent  cruel  and  devas- 
tating wars;  but  their  speedy  recuperation  betrays  the 
extent  of  their  resources,  and  reminds  us  also  that  their 
total  history  was  not  merely  one  of  war  and  calamity.  On 


CH.  Ill,  §  29  POLITICAL   LIMITATIONS  29 

this  single  point  of  material  prosperity  alone  the  contrast 
is  startling  and  appalling.  While  nearly  the  whole  of  the 
world,  at  present  called  civilized  or  semi-civilized,  illus- 
trates in  its  own  condition  one  of  the  surest  tests  of 
human  progress,  "  more  food  for  more  men,  better  food  for 
every  man,"  this  region  has  in  large  measure  reverted  to 
the  primitive  condition  of  precarious  living  for  a  scanty 
population. 

§  28.  Of  the  political  character  and  internal  organiza- 
tion of  the  peoples  inhabiting  the  region  we  have  been 
describing,  it  is  not  easy  to  convey  a  clear  and  compre- 
hensive notion  in  a  single  brief  statement.  It  must  be 
said,  however,  that  certain  general  features  were  common 
to  all  the  states  that  flourished  there  in  ancient  Semitic 
times.  Especially  noticeable  is  their  marked  limitation 
of  capacity  for  political  organization,  as  compared,  for 
instance,  with  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  Teutonic  families 
of  the  Aryan  race.  For  example,  when  we  use  the  word 
"empire"  of  the  great  Assyrian  or  Babylonian  mon- 
archy, or  even  the  word  "kingdom"  of  Israel,  Judah,  or 
Damascus,  we  must  not  transfer  to  either  of  these  the 
notions  with  which  one  associates  the  terms  in  European 
history.  As  far  as  principles  and  methods  of  administra- 
tion are  concerned,  it  would  be  much  better  to  compare 
them  with  those  of  the  present  Ottoman  Empire  —  with 
this  main  difference,  however,  that  the  Osmanli  rulers 
induced  a  reaction  towards  a  ruder  type  by  adapting  their 
system  of  rigorous  simplicity  to  countries  which  had 
already  enjoyed,  to  some  extent,  the  higher  and  more 
complex  forms  of  Western  government  imposed  on  them 
by  a  non-Oriental  race.  Less  familiar,  but  rather  better 
illustrations  in  the  matter  of  administrative  essentials, 
are  the  "  empires  "  of  Morocco  and  Muskat,  with  their  types 
of  government  purely  Semitic. 

§  29.  The  administration  of  the  separate  communities 
composing  such  an  "empire  "  illustrates  clearly  the  slen- 
der capacity  of  the  Semites  for  continuous  political  prog- 


30  LACK  OF   ORGANIZING  FACULTY  BOOK  I 

ress.  Thus,  while  the  whole  Semitic  territory  was  fre- 
quently under  the  authority  of  one  ruler,  no  large  part  of 
it  could  be  kept  in  subjection  without  repeated  reconquest 
and  chastisement  of  the  refractory  subjects.  Not  until 
the  Persians  came  upon  the  scene  was  there  anything  like 
substantial  corporate  unity  in  Western  Asia.  Although 
these  uncultured  Aryans  gained  most  of  the  elements  of 
civilization  from  the  conquered  Semites,  they  showed 
themselves  capable  of  bringing  into  and  keeping  in  sub- 
jection their  intellectual  masters  through  the  force  of  a 
sort  of  talent  which  the  latter  had  never  manifested  in  a 
very  high  degree.  Again,  the  faculty  of  forming  perma- 
nent unions  of  smaller  states,  or  of  federating  in  an  exten- 
sive scale,  such  as,  for  example,  has  been  exemplified  by 
much  less  gifted  races  like  the  Iroquois  of  North  America, 
seems  to  have  been  equally  wanting  to  the  Semite  (§  54). 
Coalition  was,  as  a  rule,  the  result  of  conquest  alone,  and 
when  the  restraining  hand  of  the  despot  was  removed, 
there  being  no  administrative  solidarity  with  any  moral 
combinatory  force,  the  transient  bonds  of  external  union 
were  snapped,  and  the  individual  states  reverted  from 
vassalage  into  temporary  independence,  only  to  be  sub- 
verted again  by  the  same  or  other  masters.  The  history 
of  Assyria  and  its  subject  states,  including  Israel,  will 
amply  illustrate  the  highest  efforts  of  Semitism  to  found 
an  empire,  and  at  the  same  time  its  inherent  incompetency 
to  consolidate  and  unify  what  it  essayed  to  govern.  An 
analogous  observation  may  be  made  of  another  branch  of 
the  ancient  Semitic  people,  who  moved  over  a  wider  space 
on  the  earth's  surface  than  even  the  Assyrians  and  Baby- 
lonians. The  Phoenicians,  in  their  unlimited  intercourse 
with  their  uncultured  customers  of  many  lands,  never 
succeeded  in  civilizing  or  assimilating  them;  and  their 
language,  unlike  the  Latin  and  Greek,  spread  little  be- 
yond their  own  mercantile  settlements.  As  Mommsen 
puts  it,1  "The  Pho3nicians  founded  factories  rather  than 

1  History  of  Rome,  Eng.  translation,  New  York,  1871,  vol.  ii,  p.  11. 


CH.  Ill,  §  31  GOVERNMENTAL   TYPES  31 

colonies."  This  lack  of  "the  instinct  of  political  life,  the 
noble  idea  of  self-governing  freedom,"  which  is  found  in 
the  otherwise  highly  endowed  Semitic  peoples,  seems  all 
the  more  singular  when  we  contrast  it  with  the  matchless 
vitality  of  the  race  —  a  paradox  continually  presented  to 
us  by  the  modern  Jews,  who  live  on  and  on,  and  yet  are 
without  a  country  and  without  a  civil  government,  and  to 
whom  the  most  despotic  monarchies  and  the  most  demo- 
cratic communities  of  the  earth  seem  equally  congenial. 

§  30.  We  can  now  look  a  little  more  closely  at  the 
political  life  of  the  Northern  Semites  during  historical 
ages.  All  that  is  known  of  the  whole  Semitic  race  war- 
rants the  belief  that  like  other  ancient  primitive  peoples 
they  began  with  tribal  organization,  each  tribe  becoming 
a  political  unit  through  the  possession  of  common  social 
customs  unified  and  perpetuated  by  common  religious 
beliefs  and  rites  and  the  worship  of  common  divinities. 
Now  leaving  out  the  earliest  and  rudest  nomadic  gather- 
ings or  rudimentary  settlements,  which  were  dissolved 
and  broken  up,  leaving  no  trace  behind  them,  and  there- 
fore making  no  history  for  themselves,  we  find  that  from 
the  fundamental  tribal  organization  there  grew,  directly 
or  indirectly,  four  principal  types  of  political  aggregation, 
representing  four  distinct  stages  of  development.  These 
are  indicated  respectively  by  the  building  of  cities  or  the 
founding  of  single  civic  communities ;  the  expansion  of 
such  states  by  conquest;  their  extension  by  colonization; 
the  direct  making  of  a  nation  by  tribal  federation. 

§  31.  The  first  of  these  types  or  stages  —  the  founding 
of  cities  —  requires  to  be  looked  at  with  particular  atten- 
tion. The  dwelling  in  villages  and  building  of  cities 
was,  of  course,  common  to  all  civilized  Semites,  running 
parallel  with  the  advance  from  the  pastoral  to  the  agricul- 
tural and  industrial  stages,  or  from  casual  barter  and  trad- 
ing in  small  travelling  companies  to  the  establishment 
of  fixed  markets  and  centres  of  supply.  Now  since  this 
characteristic  process  of  social  development  became  the 


32  SEMITIC   CITIES  AND   CITY   STATES  BOOK  I 

determining  influence  in  Semitic  corporate  life  and  gov- 
ernment, a  study  of  the  Semitic  city  with  its  adjuncts 
and  dependencies,  its  internal  administration  and  external 
relations,  the  conditions  and  stages  of  its  growth,  will 
help  us  better  than  anything  else  to  understand  the 
political  genius  of  the  race,  and  consequently  its  history. 

§  32.  In  dealing  with  the  character  of  Semitic  cities, 
a  caution  must  be  uttered  at  the  outset  similar  to  that 
expressed  already  with  regard  to  Semitic  government  in 
general  (§  28).  We  must  be  careful  to  disassociate  them 
in  our  minds  from  the  cities  of  modern  Europe,  and  even 
from  those  of  classical  antiquity.  They  have  no  real 
analogy  as  far  as  political  constitution  is  concerned  with 
the  self-governing  "city-states"  of  ancient  Greece,  with 
which  their  separate  autonomous  existence  in  such  num- 
bers naturally  suggests  an  external  resemblance.  A  Greek 
city  was  a  collection  of  citizens,  each  of  whom  took  a 
direct  share  in  civic  or  state  government,  in  this  main 
respect  resembling  the  burgesses  of  a  modern  Teutonic 
municipality.  The  divergence  from  this  ideal  presented 
by  the  Semitic  type  of  city  was  noticed  by  Aristotle 1 
when  he  cites  the  alleged  fact  that  Babylon  could  be 
entered  and  occupied  by  an  invader  at  one  end  two  days 
before  the  inhabitants  of  the  other  end  were  aware  of  the 
capture.  The  great  commercial  colonies  of  Phoenicia  made 
the  nearest  approach  to  the  Hellenic  pattern,  but  there 
was  this  important  difference,  that  the  citizens  of  the 
former  class  who  took  part  in  the  government  were  virtu- 
ally self-electing  (§  43).2 

§  33.  The  principal  Semitic  words  employed  for  "city  " 
are  themselves  very  suggestive.  We  have  first  the  fT'lp 
or  shorter  form  mp.  This  is  the  "meeting-place  "  (Hip) 

1  Politics,  iii.  3,  5. 

2  It  is  interesting  to  contrast  the  Semitic  "  city,"  in  its  territorial  appli- 
cation, with  our  word  "  township,"  the  latter  being  one  of  the  latest  sub- 
divisions of  a  large  political  whole,  the  former  the  permanent  type  of  the 
totality  of  the  state. 


CH.  Ill,  §  34          DESIGNATIONS   OF   THE   CITY  33 

of  men,  of  flocks  and  herds,  of  caravans,  of  great  routes 
of  travel.  It  indicates  merely  a  fit  gathering  point,  a 
good  station  for  trade,  a  convenient  depot  for  supplies. 
It  includes,  in  historical  usage,  everything  from  the  most 
insignificant  village  to  Jerusalem  (1  K.  i.  41,  45;  Isa. 
i.  21,  etc.)  and  Carthage  (that  is,  "New  City").  A 
second  word  T2,  though  not  necessarily  at  first  a  different 
thing,  suggests  a  different  occasion  of  naming.  It  is  a 
"watching-place,"  a  collection  of  people  having  property 
of  value  over  which  they  erected  a  primitive  watch-tower 
(cf.  Jud.  ix.  51  ff.,  for  one  of  Canaanitic  origin).  This 
indicates  a  stage  at  which  the  encampment  or  depot  was 
no  longer  likely  to  be  broken  up.  The  town  was  secured 
by  the  tower,  which  later  became  an  adjunct  of  regular 
walls  and  gates,  or  was  enlarged  into  a  citadel  (  e.y.  Jud. 
ix.  46).  A  poetical  designation  among  the  Assyrians 
and  Babylonians,  dlu,  is  also  of  interest.  Originally 
meaning  collectively  a  number  of  "tents  "  (yHX),  it  com- 
memorates the  encampment  as  the  foundation  of  the 
whole  subsequent  city.  The  word  n3"H£  ("  Medina  ")  has 
also  a  history  worthy  of  note.  Meaning  properly  a  "  juris- 
diction," it  is  employed  in  Hebrew  and  Biblical  Aramaic 
only  of  provinces  or,  loosely,  of  a  country  generally.  In 
the  Targums  it  means  both  a  province  and  a  city.  In 
Syriac,  Arabic,  and  modern  Hebrew  it  means  only  a  city. 
Its  meaning  has  thus  been  gradually  narrowed  down  to 
indicate  that  which  is  the  normal  Semitic  governmental 
unit.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  that,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  Roman  civitas  is  used  only  loosely  in  the  sense  of  urbs 
(cf.  Fr.  cite  and  ville).  There  is,  of  course,  no  Semitic 
word  answering  to  civitas  or  7ro\t<?  or  "state."  A  Semitic 
citizen,  if  the  term  can  be  so  broadly  employed,  was 
merely  a  resident  of  the  ruling  city,  and  "citizenship" 
would  have  to  be  understood  simply  of  the  observance  of 
common  customs  or  a  common  cult. 

§  34.    The  typical  Semitic  city,  large  or  small,  retained 
plainly  the  traces  of  these  historical  beginnings.     It  was 


34  FEATURES   OF   THE    SEMITIC   CITY  BOOK  I 

in  the  "  broad  place,"  near  the  gate,  that  the  public  meetings 
were  held  (Neh.  viii.  1-3),  where  the  elders  of  the  city 
sat  for  conference,  and  where  judicial  proceedings  were 
made  (Jobxxix.  7  ff. ;  Prov.  xxii.  22,  etc. ;  2  Sam.  xv.  2; 
Deut.  xvii.  5,  etc. ;  Am.  iv.  10  ff. ;  Ruth  iv.  10  ff.).  This 
was  a  marked  feature  of  Jerusalem,  for  example,  through- 
out Old  Testament  history.  The  great  bazars,  also  as  a 
rule  near  the  principal  gate,  perpetuated  the  old  institu- 
tion of  the  depot  and  market  at  the  meeting-place  of  cara- 
van roads  by  an  exposition  of  wares  from  far  and  near. 
Damascus,  for  instance,  still  has  bazars  not  unlike  those 
which  Ahab  was  permitted  by  treaty  to  hold  there  twenty- 
seven  centuries  ago  (1  K.  xx.  34).  The  wide  areas 
which  were  set  apart  for  one  trade  or  another  ( Jer.  xxxvii. 
21)  long  constituted  the  only  streets,  and  in  the  multipli- 
cation of  bazars  and  trading  booths  illustrated  the  stereo- 
typed growth  of  the  "city"  from  the  primitive  village 
through  the  increase  of  business  and  the  influx  of  capital. 
What  are  now  called  "  streets  "  were  mostly  crooked  and 
narrow  passages  from  one  "quarter"  to  another,  and  a 
broad,  straight  avenue  was  a  notable  exception.1  Gradu- 
ally there  were  added,  in  large,  prosperous  towns,  gardens 
large  and  small,  and  of  great  variety  of  plan,  as  well  as 
other  places  of  recreation.  In  the  maritime  and  river 
ports,  such  as  Tyre,  Sidon,  and  Babylon,  wharves  and 
shipping  were  to  be  seen.  But  even  at  their  fullest  devel- 
opment there  was  seldom  any  great  departure  from  the 
original  type.  The  same  divisions  were  extended  in 
larger  lots ;  the  same  primitive  institutions  were  expanded 
locally  without  essential  variation.  In  the  largest  and 
most  magnificent  metropolis  the  type  still  prevailed,  and 
the  cities,  in  their  general  aspect,  were  like  so  many  great 
walled  villages. 

§  35.    Thus  the  building  of  cities  was  the  decisive  step 

1  Hence  the  distinguishing  name  given  to  the  broad  "  Straight"  street 
(rijv  pv/jLijv  TTIV  Ka\ovfj.tvr)v  EMfiav')  in  Damascus  (Acts  ix.  11)  ;  and  Hero- 
dotus notes  specially  that  the  streets  of  Babylon  were  iOflas  (I.  180). 


CH.  Ill,  §  36        ENLARGEMENT   OF   THE   CITY  35 

towards  civilization,  recognized  as  such  by  the  Bible  it- 
self (Gen.  iv.).  It  accordingly  marks  the  first  stage  or 
type  of  Semitic  government.  It  also  led,  as  a  rule,  to  the 
important  change  of  breaking  up  the  old  tribal  organiza- 
tion without  the  simultaneous  or  subsequent  creation  of 
a  true  nationality,  since  the  new  enterprises  did  not  grow 
into  anything  more  complex  by  natural  and  spontaneous 
development.  Nor  did  the  new  settlements  then  or  there- 
after succeed  in  coalescing  peacefully  into  larger  commu- 
nities. That  is  to  say,  the  normal  Semitic  state  (city) 
did  not  enlarge  itself  by  the  absorption  and  assimilation 
of  already  organized  communities,  whether  homogeneous 
or  diverse,  but  by  accretion,  by  simple  addition,  by  at- 
taching to  itself  individuals  or  single  families  or  unclassi- 
fied hordes,  mainly  from  the  wilderness  and  desert  lands 
which  in  the  whole  interior  of  the  North-Semitic  realm 
bordered  upon  the  cultivated  territory.  The  remarkable 
thing  here  is  not  that  political  bodies  larger  than  the 
individual  cities  were  created  only  by  force,  for  this  has 
been  to  a  large  extent  paralleled  almost  everywhere  in 
human  history.  The  peculiarity  of  the  case  is  the  isola- 
tion and  mutual  repulsion  of  the  Semitic  cities,  as  they 
indicate  how  foreign  to  the  race  was  the  idea  of  a  common- 
wealth or  a  true  homogeneous  nationality. 

§  36.  Although  the  character  and  conditions  of  life  in 
cities  present  such  a  contrast  to  the  primitive  nomadic 
mode  of  existence,  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  the  early 
Semites,  who  in  Babylonia,  Mesopotamia,  or  Palestine 
founded  and  perpetuated  villages  and  towns,  passed  from 
one  form  of  association  to  another  by  anything  like  a 
sudden  transition  or  rapid  development.  Nor  are  we  to 
make  the  much  less  obvious  mistake  of  supposing  that  the 
habits  and  relations  of  the  old  patriarchal  life  were  dis- 
carded in  the  permanent  institutions  of  the  fixed  settle- 
ments. On  the  contrary,  it  is  possible  to  trace  the  influ- 
ence of  the  patriarchal  system  in  the  establishment  and 
regulation  of  the  Semitic  cities,  and  even  to  find  there  a 


36  THE   RISE   OF  KINGLETS  BOOK  I 

reproduction  in  type,  if  not  in  name  or  in  detail,  of  the 
essential  elements  of  the  old  tribal  government.  Through- 
out the  North-Semitic  realm,  the  simple  constitution  of 
the  city  or  state  included  the  rule  of  a  "king,"  between 
whom  and  the  common  people  there  stood  a  circle  of  nobles 
or  "great  men,"  the  position  of  the  one  and  the  others 
being  normally  hereditary.  This  king  was  universally 
called  malk,  even  as  it  would  appear  in  the  Babylonian 
branch  of  the  family,  though  there  the  word  was  general- 
ized into  "prince."  The  most  familiar  example  of  this 
city-state  is  that  furnished  by  the  numerous  Canaanitish 
communities  before  the  Hebrew  settlement,  each  of  them 
with  a  malk  of  its  own.  The  persistence  of  the  type  may 
be  best  illustrated  by  the  existence  of  the  title  mdlik 
among  the  Nestorians  of  Aramsean  descent  in  their  set- 
tlements in  Kurdistan,  where  the  head  of  each  "city" 
(jn'dlnta)  is  called  by  that  name,  being  chosen  to  that 
honour  by  the  citizens  upon  the  death  of  his  predecessor, 
usually  but  not  necessarily  from  the  same  family.1  The 
word  in  Aramaic  means  literally  "counsellor,"  and  this 
is  the  original  meaning  of  the  universally  employed  shorter 
word,  which  is  abbreviated  from  the  same  participle. 
Now  it  is  easy  to  see  how  the  mdlik  (rnalk^)  came  to  have 
the  "kingly"  power  in  the  primitive  city.  He  was,  we 
may  assume,  simply  the  chief  "elder"  of  the  clan  which 
founded  the  settlement,  and  as  the  main  function  of  such 
a  chief  (sAei'cA)  among  the  analogous  Arab  tribes  of  the 
present  day  is  not  to  rule,  but  to  act  as  referee,  to  repre- 
sent his  people  in  treaties  and  to  perform  generally  the 
duties  of  leader  among  the  council  of  prominent  men 
(cf.  (3ov\r)  yepovTwv  of  the  Greek  heroic  ages),  so  it  is 
natural  to  suppose  that  such  a  chief  was  regularly  ap- 
pointed head  of  each  settlement  under  the  new  system  of 
fixed  residence  with  its  extended  organization.  The  mul- 
tiplication of  functionaries  of  one  grade  and  another  was 
a  matter  of  easy  transition  according  as  the  civic  commu- 
1  See  Note  2  in  the  Appendix. 


CH.  Ill,  §  37  ISOLATION   OF   CITY   STATES  37 

nity  grew  in  population  and  territory,  as  the  social  and 
business  relations  of  new  classes  of  people  demanded 
adjustment,  as  the  administration  of  the  outlying  un walled 
districts  and  villages  claimed  attention,  and  as  the  mainte- 
nance and  control  of  the  militia  in  war  or  peace  became 
more  and  more  a  matter  of  systematic  management.  An 
instance  of  the  development  of  the  "council  of  elders  "  in 
a  large  nomadic  collection  is  described  in  Ex.  xviii.,  where 
Jethro  the  Midianite  gives,  as  the  result  of  his  own 
observation  and  reflection,  advice  upon  which  the  organi- 
zation of  the  unwieldy  aggregation  of  the  clans  of  Israel 
was  carried  out ;  and  this  may  suggest  to  us  the  beginnings 
of  the  more  varied  and  fully  developed  system  of  the 
locally  established  communities  or  "states."  One  essen- 
tial difference  is  to  be  noted  between  the  settled  and  the 
nomadic  communities :  the  "  counsellor  "  became  a  "  king. " 
But  this  change  was  inevitable,  unless  anarchy  was  to 
be  precipitated.  Doubtless  frequent  revolutions  occurred 
in  many  cases  before  the  hereditary  tyrannic  principle 1 
was  confirmed,  the  rule  being  that  the  more  extensive  and 
complicated  were  the  interests  involved,  the  greater  was 
the  need  for  a  strong  central  power.  Yet  in  all  cases  the 
Oriental  monarchies  retained  and  still  retain  the  sim- 
plicity of  administrative  type  characteristic  of  the  earliest 
"kingdoms." 

§  37.  We  are  now  prepared  to  note,  as  one  of  the  most 
striking  phenomena  of  the  times  and  of  the  region  we  are 
studying,  a  vast  number  of  cities  maintaining  a  separate 
existence,  or  after  forcible  annexation  returning  to  inde- 
pendence, each  with  its  own  chief  or  king,  and  the  petty 
court  or  circle  of  officials  belonging  to  this  primitive  type 
of  monarchy.  A  very  distinct  notion  of  these  conditions 
may  be  obtained  from  the  accounts  of  the  Hebrew  conquest 
of  Canaan,  which  was  the  result  of  a  series  of  conflicts 
with  single  independent  cities,  or  of  confederations  made 

1  As  far  as  we  know,  the  royal  succession,  unlike  that  of  the  Roman 
empire,  for  example,  was  normally  hereditary  among  the  ancient  Semites. 


38  ADJUNCTS   OF   THE   CITY 

up  of  the  same  elements  and  temporarily  formed  to  meet 
a  common  invader.  An  impression  equally  accurate  may 
be  gained  from  some  of  the  contemporary  Assyrian  records 
of  campaigns  in  the  West-land;  for  example,  from  Sina- 
cherib's  account  of  his  invasion  of  Palestine,  where  we  have 
definite  statements  with  reference  to  a  surprising  number 
of  autonomous  treaty-making  principalities  at  the  close  of 
the  eighth  century  B.C.,  and  all  within  a  territory  of  three 
thousand  square  miles.  With  this  may  be  compared  the 
list  of  kings  who  took  part  in  the  great  league  formed 
against  Shalmaneser  II  (§  228  ff.).  Such  a  combination 
as  the  last  named  was  never  again  attempted.  No  two 
campaigns  found  the  same  "  states  "  resisting  the  Assyrian 
forces,  and  the  conquest  of  Palestine  as  well  as  Mesopo- 
tamia was  really  made  possible  only  because  the  aggressors 
were  able  to  deal  with  the  separate  petty  nations  in  detail. 

§  38.  To  complete  the  general  picture  of  the  Semitic 
city  a  word  must  be  said  of  its  adjuncts  and  environment. 
Under  the  rule  and  protection  of  the  kinglet  of  the  walled 
city  naturally  came  the  unwalled  villages  O^H)  in  the 
neighbourhood,  the  farmers,  the  vine-growers,  the  market 
gardeners  of  the  cultivated  land,  and  the  shepherds  of  the 
pasture  grounds  (EH2£).  These  were  essential  to  the  in- 
dependent existence  of  the  city,  both  for  the  supply  of  the 
necessaries  of  life  and  for  the  recruiting  of  the  militia. 
And  this  was  really  all  that  was  needed  to  constitute  a 
separate  principality.  Accordingly,  we  find  that  the  vil- 
lages went  with  the  respective  cities  when  allotments  were 
made  after  conquest,  or  submission  was  tendered  after 
defeat. 

§  39.  The  second,  and,  in  relation  to  History,  the  most 
important  stage  of  Semitic  political  development  was 
reached  when  one  or  more  states  or  cities  became  the  sub- 
jects of  another.  The  former  was  then  claimed  by  the 
suzerain  to  form  part  of  his  dominion,  though  the  degrees 
of  subjection  were  very  diverse.  It  will  become  of  great 
consequence  to  us  at  a  later  stage  of  our  investigations  to 


CH.  Ill,  §  39       SUZERAIN   AND   SUBJECT   STATES  39 

make  a  special  inquiry  into  the  relations  between  the 
leading  Semitic  powers,  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  and  their 
subject  states  (§  285).  Here  it  will  be  sufficient  to  indi- 
cate in  the  most  general  way  the  position  held  by  or  forced 
upon  subject  communities  in  the  most  important  epochs 
of  North-Semitic  history.  When,  in  consequence  of 
aggression  or  other  causes,  war  arose  between  one  state 
and  another,  the  vanquished  nation  or  city  was  as  a  gen- 
eral thing  not  at  once  annexed  by  the  conqueror,  but  merely 
reduced  to  vassalage  upon  condition  of  paying  a  regular 
tribute.  With  this  also  seems  to  have  gone  regularly  the 
obligation  to  support  the  superior  state  in  its  own  mili- 
tary undertakings  (cf.  §  55).  As  a  principle,  the  degree 
of  rigour  with  which  the  exercise  of  sovereign  rights  was 
accompanied  depended  upon  the  stubbornness  and  length 
of  the  resistance  offered;  and  it  sometimes  happened  that 
submission  was  made  on  prudential  grounds  without  any 
actual  collision  between  the  two  communities.  In  this 
case,  the  yoke  of  the  suzerain  was  apt  to  be  light  in  the 
extreme,  the  main  thing  to  be  secured  being  the  regular 
and  punctual  payment  of  tribute  without  any  overt  dis- 
content. Thus  the  great  commercial  cities  of  Tyre  and 
Sidon,  at  the  height  of  their  power,  usually  preferred  to 
allow  the  kings  of  Assyria  and  Persia  to  tithe  their  rev- 
enue rather  than  embark  in  harassing  wars  that  would  in 
any  event  cripple  their  commercial  ventures.  In  case  of 
a  subsequent  refusal  of  tribute,  the  seditious  city  or  state 
was  threatened  or  chastised,  and  a  heaver  tribute  imposed. 
If  it  became  further  recalcitrant,  it  was  formally  annexed, 
its  government  abolished,  and  its  affairs  administered  by 
the  superior  state.  Should  it  finally  make  another  attempt 
to  recover  its  liberties,  it  would  often  be  destroyed,  its 
walls  thrown  down,  and  its  inhabitants  sold  as  slaves  or 
scattered  abroad.  It  scarcely  needs  to  be  remarked  that 
these  processes  might  be  abridged  or  lengthened  in  special 
instances  according  to  the  behaviour  of  the  vassals,  the 
degree  of  barbarity  and  rapacity  of  the  superiors,  or  the 


40  PERSISTENCE   OF   THE   CITY  TYPE  BOOK  I 

fluctuations  of  their  power  and  fortunes.  In  the  earliest 
days  among  rude  communities  the  methods  of  subjugation 
were  doubtless  summary  and  drastic.  Such  a  process  of 
gradual  self-aggrandizement  at  the  expense  of  neighbour- 
ing cities  and  their  dependent  districts,  even  when  the 
communities  involved  were  of  the  same  race  and  of  cognate 
religions,  was,  for  example,  that  put  into  practice  in  the 
early  history  of  the  states  of  Babylonia.  Here  one  city 
after  another  took  the  hegemony  both  in  the  lower  and 
upper  divisions  of  the  country;  and  the  same  principle 
was  exemplified  in  the  rise  and  final  predominance  of 
Babel  over  the  whole  of  Babylonia.  Nor  was  it  otherwise 
when  Nineveh  began  its  resistless  course  of  conquest  and 
absorption.  It  was  by  the  subjugation  and  annexation 
or  destruction  of  cities,  large  and  small,  from  the  Per- 
sian Gulf  to  Cilicia  that  its  imperial  rank  and  sway  were 
attained. 

§  40.  The  methods  and  policy  pursued  in  the  subjuga- 
tion of  one  state  by  another,  as  above  broadly  outlined, 
were  exemplified  even  in  the  very  highest  condition  of 
political  development  attained  by  the  North-Semitic  peo- 
ples. But  at  every  stage  the  principle  of  the  permanence 
and  universality  of  the  "city  "  was  obviously  maintained. 
The  inherent  limitations  thus  suggested  of  the  political 
institutions  of  the  race  may  be  illustrated  by  a  few  strik- 
ing facts.  At  the  time  when  the  last  great  dynasty  of 
Assyrian  rulers  had  welded  together  the  constituent  por- 
tions of  the  empire  with  the  strongest  of  bonds  which 
could  be  forged  by  force  or  policy,  revolts  were  breaking 
out  in  various  sections  of  the  great  dominion;  and  these 
were,  as  a  rule,  insurrections  of  cities.  Even  under  the 
pressure  of  common  suffering  and  loss  it  was  difficult  to 
$ecure  co-operative  action.  Each  city  with  its  environ- 
ment had  to  strike  for  itself.  It  might  naturally  be  sup- 
posed that  at  least  in  Assyria  proper  would  have  been 
realized  a  fair  measure  of  solidity;  but  even  this  appar- 
ently belonged  to  the  unattainable.  While  governors 


On.  Ill,  §  40  INSTANCES   FROM    HISTORY  41 

were  appointed  over  the  respective  cities  of  the  central 
region,  outbreaks  were  not  unfrequent  in  these  very  locali- 
ties. Even  one  of  the  suburbs  of  Nineveh  had  an  insur- 
rection of  its  own,  because  it  was  originally  established 
as  a  separate  community,  and  of  course  retained  its  corpo- 
rate individuality  (§  258).  When  we  consider  such  facts 
as  have  been  cited,  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  that  the 
Assyrian  annalists  in  relating  the  dealings  of  their  mas- 
ters with  outside  communities  speak  of  the  same  locality 
sometimes  as  a  "city  "  (jiiaMz),  sometimes  as  a  "country  " 
(;w/0.  To  take  familiar  examples  of  the  general  status 
of  the  Semitic  communities,  one  hardly  knows  whether 
to  regard  Damascus  as  a  city  or  a  country  viewed  in  its 
international  relations.  And  even  in  the  case  of  those 
exceptional  Semitic  states  which  did  not  grow  from  cities, 
but  through  tribal  federation,  the  capital  city  came  gradu- 
ally to  absorb  the  surrounding  country.  Thus  was  it  with 
Samaria  and  Jerusalem,  with  which  the  Northern  and 
Southern  Kingdoms  respectively  wrere  so  identified  that 
the  survival  of  nationality  depended  absolutely  on  the 
ability  of  these  capitals  to  resist  an  invading  army. 
Finally,  it  may  be  observed  with  regard  to  the  most  com- 
plete examples  of  governmental  development  that  it  was 
not  Assyria  or  Babylonia  that  actually  ruled  the  subject 
states:  it  was  the  cities  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon.  It  was 
not  even  the  Assyrio-Babylonian  race,  except,  so  to  speak, 
by  accident,  that  came  to  be  at  the  head  of  Western  Asian 
affairs.  This  race  secured  its  predominance  because  to 
it  fell  a  territory  admitting  of  the  development  of  large 
cities,  which  became  the  centres  of  commercial  and  polit- 
ical activity  and  aggressive  conquest.  The  race,  to 
be  sure,  furnished  the  necessary  ambition,  endurance, 
and  persistence;  but  these  qualities  were  conserved 
and  brought  into  play  through  historical  conditions  and 
political  tendencies  which  did  not  affect  Assyria  or 
Babylonia  alone,  but  belonged  to  the  Semitic  people  as  a 
whole. 


42  THE    COLONIZING   TYPE  BOOK  I 

§  41.  A  third  type  of  Semitic  settlement  was  that 
formed  by  colonizing.  We  have  seen  that  the  most 
prominent  part  borne  in  extension  by  conquest  was  that 
performed  by  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  division  of 
the  race.  In  colonization  it  was  a  section  of  the  Western 
or  Canaanitic  branch  that  played  the  most  important  r81e. 
In  dealing  with  this  subject,  however  cursorily,  it  is 
necessary  to  distinguish  the  different  occasions  of  the 
spread  of  the  Semitic  settlements.  One  might,  loosely 
speaking,  include  the  migration  of  nomadic  tribes,  which 
resulted  in  the  formation  of  fixed  civic  communities,  under 
the  general  head  of  colonizing.  Such,  for  example,  was 
the  result  of  the  transfer  of  the  Hebrews  from  their  unset- 
tled condition  in  Egypt  to  Canaan  with  its  political  and 
social  consequences.  Such,  again,  was  the  character  of 
the  occupation  of  Laish  by  the  people  of  the  tribe  of  Dan 
(Jud.  xviii.),  following  the  common  Israelitish  impulse 
to  inhabit  cities  which  they  had  not  built  for  themselves. 
But  these  and  kindred  popular  movements,  large  or  small, 
hardly  represent  the  idea  of  the  extension  of  the  state. 
Colonizing,  in  the  proper  sense,  —  the  founding  of  new 
settlements  which  repeat  the  general  governmental  type 
of  the  parent  state,  —  may  be  said  to  fall,  among  the 
Semites,  into  two  main  classes  or  species.  There  was, 
first,  the  transplanting  into  a  conquered  city  or  district 
of  a  number  of  settlers  from  the  country  of  the  conquer- 
ors. This  was  a  favourite  method  of  the  earlier  Assyrian 
policy  in  the  efforts  that  \vere  so  persistently  made  to 
settle  Mesopotamia  and  the  northern  mountain  country 
with  a  population  loyal  to  Asshur.  In  some  cases  the 
colonists  and  their  descendants  remained  true,  under  great 
difficulties,  to  the  home  government ;  in  others  they  joined 
in  outbreaks  against  Assyria.  It  is  as  yet  difficult  to  get 
an  accurate  idea  of  how  much  this  policy  actually  contrib- 
uted to  the  extension  of  the  empire.  Probably  it  was 
seldom  permanently  successful.  At  any  rate,  the  most 
statesmanlike  of  the  kings  of  Assyria  found  it  necessary 


CH.   Ill,  §  42          ASSYRIANS   AND   ARAMAEANS  43 

to  carry  out  consistently  a  much  more  drastic  policy,  that 
of  uprooting  rebellious  vassals,  and  substituting  for  them 
conquered  peoples  from  some  other  portion  of  his  domin- 
ions. This  process,  which  alone  secured  the  lasting 
ascendancy  of  Assyria,  can  hardly  be  called  colonizing 
in  the  proper  sense.  It  is  greatly  to  be  regretted  that  so 
little  can  be  ascertained  of  the  methods  of  colonization 
adopted  by  the  Aramaeans  when  they  peopled  the  land 
west  of  the  Euphrates  from  their  proper  home  in  Meso- 
potamia. It  is  very  likely  that  their  occupation  of  the 
country  was  in  many  cases  similar  to  that  effected  by  the 
Hebrews  in  Canaan.  In  some  instances,  no  doubt,  they 
gradually  and  peacefully  mixed  with  the  inhabitants  of 
the  cities  already  founded  by  Hettites  and  other  non- 
Semitic  peoples.  It  must  have  been  a  rare  exception 
when  they  built  cities  of  their  own  in  lands  which,  unlike 
Mesopotamia,  had  been  occupied  by  preceding  civiliza- 
tions ;  and  we  may  safely  take  for  granted  that  their 
principal  settlements  through  the  length  and  breadth  of 
Syria  from  Damascus  to  the  Euphrates  were  developed 
upon  foundations  already  broadly  laid  by  Amorites  or 
Hettites.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Aramaeans  were  the 
explorers,  par  excellence,  of  the  Semites,  as  far  as  com- 
mercial enterprise  by  land  was  concerned,  inasmuch  as 
their  expeditions  penetrated  far  into  the  interior  of  Asia 
Minor.  In  this  sense,  however,  they  can  hardly  be  called 
colonists,  since  the  mere  establishment  of  trading-posts 
or  the  temporary  occupation  of  trade  centres  furnished 
no  basis  for  the  creation  of  permanent  settlements  con- 
tinually replenished  from  their  own  or  a  kindred  stock, 
and  administered  upon  the  model  of  the  parent  com- 
munities. 

§  42.  The  second  method,  one  more  akin  to  colonizing 
in  the  modern  sense,  was  that  pursued  by  the  maritime 
Canaanites.  What  the  Aramaeans  aimed  at  by  their  land 
traffic,  that  and  much  more  was  achieved  by  the  Phoeni- 
cians on  the  sea.  These  people  were  cut  off  politically  by 


44  PHOENICIAN   SETTLEMENTS  BOOK  I 

the  isolating  tendency  of  their  institutions  from  their 
nearest  kindred  in  Central  Palestine,  and,  as  a  rule,  held 
it  to  be  no  business  of  theirs  to  fight  with  them  or  with 
the  stronger  powers.  With  the  latter  they  preferred  to 
compromise  by  presents  or  tribute.  Thus  securing  peace, 
they  learned  to  utilize  their  unrivalled  position  on  the 
Mediterranean  for  the  creation  and  extension  of  a  trade  of 
enormous  expansion  and  value.  In  working  up  traffic 
with  the  islands  and  inhabited  coastlands  of  the  Great 
Sea,  and  with  Egypt  and  the  nearer  and  more  distant 
East,  they  came  by  the  necessities  of  their  business  and 
by  virtue  of  their  commercial  enterprise  to  found  a  large 
number  of  trading-stations  extending  to  the  remotest 
West,  and  even  along  the  Atlantic.1  These  were  fixed 
mostly  on  islands  near  the  coast,  as  being  less  liable  to 
attack  or  more  easily  defended  with  their  ships  than  posi- 
tions further  inland.  In  this  they  followed  the  example 
set  by  the  founders  of  their  own  seaports,  of  which  Tyre, 
in  situation  and  defensibility,  was  the  most  striking  and 
famous  instance.  This  is  not  the  place  to  give  a  detailed 
account  of  these  remarkable  settlements.  It  is  more 
proper  to  indicate  here  their  general  relation  to  the  parent 
cities.  As  they  were  established  in  the  interest  of  trade, 
they  were  allowed,  with  little  restriction,  to  go  their  own 
way,  and  to  develop  themselves  according  to  their  bent 
and  natural  advantages.  Close  communication  was  main- 
tained with  and  frequent  immigration  made  to  the  most 
important  of  them.  Thus  it  happened,  for  example,  that 
Carthage,  in  consequence  of  the  political  misfortunes  of 
Tyre  brought  about  by  Sargon  and  Sinacherib  of  Assyria, 
Nebuchadrezzar  of  Babylon,  and  Alexander  of  Macedon, 
became  the  refuge  of  the  chief  citizens  of  the  metropolis. 
Most  of  the  colonies  of  importance  were  held  under  a  very 
mild  form  of  the  general  system  of  vassalage.  The  trib- 
ute expected  was  light,  and  ships  and  sailors  were  more 
in  demand  than  money  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  obliga- 

1  See  Note  3  in  the  Appendix. 


CH.  Ill,  §  43  DEMOCRATIC   TENDENCIES  45 

tions  to  the  mother  state.  Of  some  of  them,  for  example, 
Utica,1  in  the  tenth  century  B.C.  and  Kition  (DTD)  in 
the  eighth,  we  know  that  a  refusal  to  furnish  the  usual 
tribute  was  followed  by  armed  compulsion.  Kition,2  whose 
importance  in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  Phoenician  world- 
commerce  may  be  inferred  from  the  use  of  the  name 
("  Chittim  ")  among  the  Hebrews,  was  doubtless  kept  in 
close  subjection  because  its  independent  development  in 
the  close  neighbourhood  of  Tyre  might  interfere  with  the 
prosperity  of  the  latter.  The  colonies  had  no  representa- 
tion in  the  councils  of  the  parent  states. 

§  43.  Such  unbounded  maritime  enterprise,  varied 
commercial  activity,  and  the  world-wide  relations  estab- 
lished thereby  with  foreign  peoples  of  the  most  diverse 
races  and  conditions  had  an  influence  upon  the  political 
system  of  the  Phoenicians  of  the  utmost  importance.  They 
became  far  more  democratic  than  any  other  of  the  Semites. 
It  is  true  that  the  kingly  power  was  never  permanently 
dispensed  with  in  Phoenicia  proper,  but  there  gradually 
came  to  be  a  compromise  between  it  and  that  of  the  nobles, 
who  themselves  represented  not  only  the  "elders  "  of  the 
Canaanitic  city,  but  a  select  proportion  of  the  "merchants 
who  were  altogether  princes."  It  is  not  difficult  to  see 
how  the  constitution  of  these  modernized  Phoenician  com- 
munities came  to  differ  so  greatly  from  that  of  the  military 
states  which  were  developed  through  conquest.  The 
growth  of  extensive  manufacturing  and  commercial  inter- 
ests through  private  enterprise,  unfettered  by  the  demands 
of  military  conscription  and  the  maintenance  of  a  stand- 
ing army,  led  inevitably  to  a  sentiment  of  individual 
independence  and  the  development  of  something  remotely 
resembling  civic  freedom.  Their  wealth  and  luxury  were 
created  by  the  peaceful  exertions  of  their  own  citizens,  and 
not  secured  by  plunder  and  the  force  of  arms,  or  the  im- 

1  Under  Ilirom  I  :   rots  rt  'IrvKalois  twtffTpa.Tcv<Ta.To  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  5,  3 
(ed.  Niese,  Berlin,  1888). 

2  Under  Elulaeus  :  dTroffTdvTuv  KtTTaluv  Jos.  Ant.  ix.  14,  2. 


46  CITIES   OF   PHOENICIA   PROPER  BOOK  I 

position  of  tribute  gathered  by  imperial  officials,  as  was  the 
case  in  Assyria  and  Babylon.  The  creators  of  such  capi- 
tal —  the  proprietors  of  the  factories,  the  mines,  the  ships, 
and  the  warehouses  —  could  insist  on  the  free  disposal  of 
their  wealth;  and  this  of  itself  was  a  long  step  towards  the 
assertion  of  a  right  to  be  consulted  in  the  adjustment  of 
mutual  interests  and  of  the  concerns  of  the  community  as 
a  whole.  It  is,  accordingly,  not  surprising  to  learn  that 
Sidon  had  in  the  later  times  a  council  consisting  of  be- 
tween five  and  six  hundred  members.  In  the  colonies, 
when  independence  of  the  mother  country  was  estab- 
lished, as  in  the  case  of  Carthage,  there  was  no  attempt 
to  re-establish  the  Canaanitic  type  of  kingship;  but  the 
chief  control  was  put  into  the  hands  of  an  oligarchy  con- 
sisting of  a  duumvirate  of  suffetes,  or  "regulators"  (O.  T. 
D^tOBtT,  "judges").  In  Carthage  there  was  in  addition  a 
feenate  afterwards  modified  by  a  large  administrative  com- 
mittee of  citizens ;  but  there  were  no  popular  assemblies, 
and  the  fact  that  the  initiative  in  nominations  for  civic 
office  was  not  taken  by  the  citizens  at  large  made  the 
government,  with  all  its  division  of  authority,  more  of 
an  aristocracy  than  a  democracy. 

§  44.  Of  the  mutual  relations  of  the  states  or  cities  of 
Phoenicia  proper,  we  know  very  little,  the  most  outstand- 
ing fact  being  that,  while  Sidon  was  at  first  supreme,  a 
hegemony  was  exercised  by  Tyre  over  all  the  coast  cities 
of  the  neighbourhood  during  the  long  period  when  she  was 
at  the  height  of  her  prosperity.  We  must  not  suppose, 
however,  that  serious  wars  took  place  between  the  cities 
before  the  superiority  of  any  one  of  them  was  established. 
At  least  we  do  not  know  of  such;  and  it  is  very  reasona- 
ble to  assume  that  the  weaker  states  held  towards  Tyre 
the  same  prudent  policy  of  peaceful  concessions  which 
•all  in  common  pursued,  as  a  rule,  towards  the  Assyrians 
and  their  successors  in  imperial  power  in  Western  Asia. 
Thereafter  the  suzerainty  exercised  by  Tyre  increased  in 
the  direction  of  absolute  sovereignty,  as  she  achieved  her 


CH.  Ill,  §  40          ABSENCE   OF   LAND   TILLAGE  47 

incomparable  growth  in  wealth  and  in  all  the  resources 
of  civilization.  Yet  the  essential  forms  of  traditional 
monarchy  were  preserved,  at  least  in  all  the  cities  of  note ; 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  the  Tyrians  ever 
undertook  the  administration  of  the  affairs  of  any  of  the 
smaller  communities  after  the  manner  of  Assyrian  an- 
nexation. 

§  45.  It  only  remains  to  be  added  here,  with  regard  to 
the  general  features  of  Phoenician  life,  that  the  necessary 
absence  of  the  agricultural  class  formed  a  marked  distinc- 
tion between  that  people  and  their  Canaanitic  brethren. 
The  products  of  the  inland  were  coveted  by  the  mercantile 
population  of  the  cities  on  the  coast,  who  had  no  direct 
source  of  food  supply  (Ezek.  xxvii.  17;  cf.  Ezra  iii.  7,  Acts 
xii.  20)  ;  and  the  additional  fact  that  the  Phoenicians  were 
remote  from  the  nomadic  settlements,  from  which  the 
other  Semitic  communities  were  recruited,  made  it  a  mat- 
ter of  importance  to  them  to  be  able  to  draw  upon  other 
countries  for  labourers  and  seamen.  In  the  treaty  between 
Hiram  and  Solomon,  by  virtue  of  which  a  number  of  dis- 
tricts in  the  interior  were  ceded  to  the  former,  we  may 
observe  an  attempt  to  secure  the  permanent  basis  of  a  food 
supply;  while  in  the  men-stealing  raids  practised  by  Tyre 
and  Sidon,  we  have  a  painful  suggestion  of  a  method 
frequently  adopted  in  order  to  secure  working-hands  for 
themselves  and  their  customers,  in  addition  to  the  slaves 
whom  they  obtained  in  the  way  of  commercial  exchange 
(Ezek.  xxvii.  13).  In  the  larger  Phoenician  colonies 
bordering  upon  rich  agricultural  soil,  earnest  endeavours 
were  made  to  secure  independent  tillage,  or  at  least  a 
large  proportion  of  the  annual  produce;  and,  in  fact,  it 
was  the  development  of  Carthage  into  a  community  of 
planters  as  well  as  merchants,  which  gave  it  its  immense 
financial  resources. 

§  46.  The  fourth  type  of  political  development  is  that 
exhibited  in  the  making  of  a  nation  directly  by  means  of 
tribal  federation.  In  this  case,  the  autonomy  given  to 


48  DIRECT   TRIBAL   FEDERATION  BOOK  I 

the  new  community  did  not  proceed  from  the  city  as  the 
highest  unit  of  government  real  or  nominal,  but  was  based 
upon  the  direct  choice  of  the  tribe  or  clan.  Yet  it  was 
impossible  for  an  association  of  tribes  to  become  a  nation 
while  they  were  still  in  the  nomadic  stage.  The  posses- 
sion and  development  of  fixed  settlements  was  always  an 
essential  condition  of  nation-making,  for  the  reason  that 
it  is  the  tenure  and  utilization  of  a  definite  area  of  terri- 
tory which  gives  permanence  to  any  social  or  political 
factor,  whether  the  family,  the  clan,  or  the  state.  The 
conditions  of  pastoral  and  migratory  life  are  at  once  too 
simple  and  too  fluctuating  to  admit  of  the  founding  of  a 
stable  society.  The  limitations  of  patriarchal  government 
are  bound  to  be  felt,  no  matter  how  strong  may  be  the 
tribal  feeling  and  the  clannishness  that  characterize  a  race 
of  shepherds  and  hunters.  There  are  two  main  causes  of 
the  instability  of  such  a  community.  There  is,  in  the 
first  place,  the  fact  that  the  real  determining  and  cohesive 
unit  is  not  the  tribe  or  clan,  but  the  family.  The  tribe  is 
an  aggregation  of  people  having  a  vague  persuasion  that 
they  are  of  common  descent,  but  bound  together  mainly 
by  the  possession  of  certain  traditional  customs,  social 
and  religious,  the  observance  of  which  constitutes  the 
badge  of  membership  in  the  society.  The  clan  differs 
from  the  tribe,  in  being  limited  by  the  consciousness  of  a 
common  close  relationship.  Now,  the  necessity  of  the 
extension  of  the  family  by  intermarriage  with  outsiders 
—  a  universal  habit  among  Semitic  peoples  —  broke 
through  the  exclusiveness  of  the  clan,  and  therefore 
finally  also  the  unity  of  the  tribe.  Again,  the  permanent 
or  casual  neighbourhood  of  other  tribes,  related  or  unre- 
lated, led  to  the  continual  absorption  of  new  elements  and 
the  secession  of  old  members.  Accordingly,  the  identity 
and  homogeneity  of  the  tribe  were  really  attested  by  the 
obvious  marks  of  a  commo7i  language  and  common  cus- 
toms, and  not  by  the  less  easily  ascertainable  criterion  of 
kinship.  Under  these  circumstances,  it  was  impossible 


CH.  Ill,  §  47       RARE   CONDITIONS   OF   SUCH   UNION  49 

for  men  in  a  simple  society  to  found  anything  like  perma-| 
nent  civil  institutions.  There  were,  it  is  true,  both 
among  Northern  and  Southern  Semites,  many  tribal  com- 
binations which  were  rich  and  powerful,  and  could  make 
their  strength  felt  either  as  substantial  allies  or  formi- 
dable foes.  Such  were  some  of  the  principal  Aramaean 
tribes  along  the  Lower  Euphrates  and  Tigris  (§  339), 
several  of  the  tribes  or  "  nations  "  of  Northern  Arabia, 
and  the  Midianites  of  the  times  of  the  "Judges"  of 
Israel.  A  few  of  these  even  attained  to  the  reputed  rank 
of  a  kingdom ;  for  example,  the  Arabian  tribes  that  com- 
bined under  the  rule  of  a  "  queen  "  in  the  eighth  century 
B.C.  (§  334).  Such  titular  sovereignty  was,  however, 
only  a  transfer  of  names  from  more  or  less  analogous  con- 
ditions among  settled  populations,  and  the  use  of  the 
term,  as  applied  to  what  were  really  chiefs  or  chieftain- 
eases,  only  shows  with  Avhat  latitude  the  term  "  king " 
was  employed  in  the  old  Semitic  times,  or,  in  other  words, 
how  many  different  kinds  and  degrees  there  were  of  the 
supreme  governmental  dignity.  Such  aggregations  of 
people,  as  was  natural,  enjoyed  no  very  lengthened  corpo- 
rate existence;  and  in  contrast  to  some  of  these  nomadic 
peoples  presently  to  be  mentioned,  who  addicted  them- 
selves, within  fixed  geographical  limits,  to  the  cultivation 
of  the  soil,  their  names  speedily  vanished  from  the  records 
of  the  race. 

§  47.  As  already  indicated,  the  oldest  Semitic  cities, 
which  were  at  the  same  time  the  earliest  type  of  stable 
government,  were  founded  for  purposes  of  security  and 
convenient  supply,  in  the  interests  of  business  that 
depended  upon  agriculture  or  trading  (§  31  ff.).  In 
either  case  the  population  was  originally  nomadic,  gradu- 
ally taking  up  with  the  tilling  of  the  soil  and  with  indus- 
trial pursuits.  We  have  no  historical  record  of  the  times 
when  the  decisive  steps  were  taken  which  resulted  in  the 
founding  of  permanent  settlements  from  wilderness  and 
pasture  lands.  The  earliest  cities  of  Palestine  east  and 


50  INSTANCES  OF   A   T1UBAL   NATION  BOOK  I 

west  of  Jordan,  and  those  of  Lower  Babylonia,  and  even 
those  of  Mesopotamia,  had  long  been  established  when 
their  oldest  surviving  monuments  were  made.  It  is  alto- 
gether different  with  this  fourth  type  of  state-making. 
Some  of  the  most  noteworthy  of  the  tribal  federations 
which  grew  into  nations  took  place  within  historical 
times,  and  we  can  trace  with  approximate  accuracy  the 
steps  in  their  progress.  We  have  just  seen  (§  46)  that 
it  was  impossible  for  such  an  achievement  to  be  reached 
while  the  tribes  were  still  in  their  native  seats  with  their 
primitive  modes  of  life.  On  the  other  hand,  it  can  be 
positively  affirmed  that  every  such  national  evolution_.was 
accomplished  by  peoples  originally  nomadic  who  came  to 
dwell  in  cities,  not  of  their  own  building,  but  acquired 
by  immigration  or  conquest,  or  rather  by  both  combined. 
The  most  stupendous  example  of  such  an  achievement 
among  the  Semites  was  the  creation  of  the  Caliphate  by 
the  nomads  of  Arabia  under  the  impulse  of  Islam.  Of 
still  greater  importance  to  the  world,  though  on  a  very 
much  smaller  scale,  was  the  occupation  of  Canaan  by  the 
Hebrews.  But  there  was  this  essential  difference  be- 
tween the  two  epoch-making  movements,  that  the  former 
was  not  a  case  of  tribal  federation  after  conquest,  but  of 
the  partition  of  an  immense  portion  of  newly  acquired 
territory  among  the  leaders  of  the  conquerors  mainly 
according  to  historically  recognized  boundaries.  In  fact, 
we  have  to  note,  as  a  most  remarkable  phenomenon,  that 
the  only  known  voluntary  associations  of  tribes  thus  coa- 
lescing to  form  a  nation  among  the  Semitic  peoples  were 
those  formed  by  the  Hebrew  race.  The  Canaanites  devel- 
oped only  government  in  independent  cities.  The  Assyri- 
ans and  Babylonians,  though  they  spread  more  widely, 
and  continually  conquered  and  annexed  and  organized, 
did  not  depart  essentially  from  the  same  idea.  The  Ara- 
maeans of  historical  times  might  be  expected  to  furnish 
examples  most  nearly  parallel  to  the  movements  of  the 
Hebrews;  but  when  and  so  far  as  they  left  their  encamp- 


CH.  Ill,  §  48      HEBREW'S   AND   THEIR   KINDRED  51 

ments  and  trading-posts,  they  fell  into  line  with  the  nor- 
mal Semitic  habit,  and  manifested  their  political  aptitudes 
by  building  up  great  inland  commercial  cities  like  Haran 
and  Damascus;  and  their  numerous  kingdoms,  east  and 
west  of  the  River,  were,  as  far  as  we  know,  developed  ac- 
cording to  the  general  Semitic  analogy  from  important 
centres  such  as  these.  All  the  more  noteworthy,  there- 
fore, is  the  strong  sense  of  brotherhood,  the  feeling  of 
homogeneity,  the  consciousness  of  a  worthy  destiny,  and. 
above  all,  the  power  of  their  common  religion,  which 
united  the  various  scattered  clans  of  the  Hebrew  race,  and 
precluded  their  apparently  inevitable  disintegration.  At 
the  same  time  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  antecedent 
conditions,  without  which  the  federation  of  the  tribes 
into  national  unity  would  have  been  impossible,  were 
the  great  and  goodly  cities  which  they  had  not  built,  and 
houses  full  of  all  good  things  which  they  had  not  filled, 
and  cisterns  hewn  out  which  they  had  not  hewn,  vine- 
yards and  olive-trees  which  they  had  not  planted  (Deut. 
vi.  10  f.). 

§  48.  The  Hebraic  peoples  besides  Israel  wrho  eventu- 
ally realized  more  or  less  fully  the  idea  of  the  nation  upon 
the  tribal  basis  were  the  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and 
Edomites.  Of  these,  the  Moabites  were  by  far  the  most 
highly  organized  and  the  furthest  removed  from  the 
nomadic  stage.  We  cannot  trace  the  development  of 
Moab  from  the  earliest  settlement  of  Abraham's  tent- 
dwelling  kindred  to  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom. 
We  only  know  that  the  Moabites  were  not  the  first  to 
found  cities  on  the  fertile  mountain  slopes  and  tablelands 
east  of  the  Dead  Sea;  that  they  had  attained  the  status  of 
a  kingdom  before  Israel  entered  upon  its  possession  in 
Canaan;  and  that  this  political  consolidation  was  reached, 
not  by  the  extension  of  the  power  of  any  of  the  numerous 
cities  of  that  highly  cultivated  region,  but  by  the  unifica- 
tion of  the  clans  which  had  gradually  dispossessed  the  pre- 
ceding Amorite  colonizers.  Still  less  do  we  know  of  the 


52  AMMON,    EDOM,   ISRAEL  BOOK  I 

foundation  and  actual  extent  of  the  state  founded  by  their 
kindred,  the  Ammonites.  Their  little  kingdom  also 
preceded  that  of  Israel.  They  had  few  cities,  and  these 
were  created  in  the  interest  of  agriculture,  an  industry 
which  was  continually  being  recruited  by  colonies  from 
the  larger  nomadic  community  of  the  eastern  desert. 
Of  the  four  Hebraic  nations,  Ammon  was  the  one  which 
was  most  purely  a  tribal  development.  Its  paucity 
of  fixed  settlements  and  its  tenacity  of  race  feeling 
(cf.  §  40  f.)  alike  attest  its  continual  nearness  to  the  origi- 
nal tribal  type.  The  remaining  community,  Edom,  was, 
with  the  possible  exception  of  Israel,  the  most  mixed  in 
race  of  the  Hebraic  peoples,  since  it  was  perpetually  ab- 
sorbing members  of  one  or  another  of  the  Arabian  tribes 
of  the  vicinity.  Its  situation  seemed  little  favourable  to 
the  establishment  of  a  nation;  but  like  the  other  two  kin- 
dred and  rivals  of  Israel,  it  had  attained  to  the  degree  of 
a  kingdom  before  that  people  had  given  up  its  wanderings. 
The  occasion  of  the  growth  of  certain  of  its  rocky  fast- 
nesses into  cities  of  note  and  long  renown  —  such  as 
Bosra  and  Petra  —  was  not  the  pursuit  of  agriculture, 
to  which  only  a  limited  area  of  the  Edomitic  territory 
was  suited,  but  the  necessities  of  trade,  both  inland  and 
maritime. 

§  40.  The  gradual  evolution  of  the  Hebrew  nationality 
from  its  primitive  tribal  conditions  can  only  be  learned 
from  a  close  study  of  the  historical  process,  as  it  is  detailed 
in  or  may  be  inferred  from  the  extant  memorials.  It  will  be 
sufficient  here  to  point  out  that  it  embraced  two  main 
stages.  The  transition  period  was,  of  course,  the  occupa- 
tion by  the  tribes  or  clans  of  their  permanent  home.  This 
end  was  consciously  attained  less  through  a  common 
national  Hebrew  feeling  than  through  tribal  interest;  that 
is  to  say,  the  history  of  the  gradual  appropriation  of  Ca- 
naan shows  that  what  determined  the  policy  and  movements 
of  the  new  settlers  was  mainly  the  impulse  or  ambition  of 
single  clans  or  families.  Where  the  influence  of  the 


CH.  Ill,  §  49          TRANSITIONS ;   THE  JUDGES  53 

whole  body  of  the  people  was  particularly  felt  was  in  the 
attempt  to  secure  for  each  section  that  portion  of  territory 
to  which,  for  one  reason  or  another,  it  could  put  forward 
the  most  powerful  claim.  The  slow  process  of  settlement 
and  adjustment  to  the  new  physical  and  social  conditions 
brought  on  the  real  beginning  of  governmental  develop- 
ment. It  may  be  called  broadly  the  epoch  of  the 
"Judges."  Its  essential  outcome  was  the  consolidation 
of  individual  tribes,  or  sometimes  of  small  tribal  groups ; 
in  other  words,  the  subordination  of  the  lately  acquired 
cities,  with  their  circumjacent  unwalled  villages  and 
fields,  to  the  control  of  the  tribes.  The  immediate  occa- 
sion of  this  was  the  necessity  of  combination,  in  the  first 
place,  against  the  still  unsubdued  Canaanites,  and,  in  the 
second  place,  and  principally,  against  the  incursions  and 
oppressions  of  powerful  neighbours.  This  sense  of  a  com- 
mon danger  must  therefore  be  recognized  as  the  chief 
providential  determining  cause  of  the  growth  of  Israel 
into  a  nation ;  without  it  the  people,  unused  to  the  luxury 
and  ease  of  their  new  residence,  would  have  fallen  under 
the  influence  of  local  seductions  to  self-indulgence  and 
Baal -worship,  and  the  uniting  bond,  the  stern  religion  of 
Jehovah,  often  enough  relaxed,  would  have  been  every- 
where broken.  Organically,  however,  the  Hebrews  of  the 
period  passed  through  little  formal  change.  The  holding 
of  councils  by  the  heads  of  the  clans  and  families  was  the 
chief  outward  mark  of  increasing  solidarity.  What  gives 
the  name  to  the  period,  the  rule  of  the  "  Judges, "  significant 
as  it  was,  must  be  regarded  as  a  temporary  makeshift  to 
secure  unity  of  action,  yet  pointing  to  the  inevitable  insti- 
tution of  monarchy.  The  office  of  "  Judge  "  (I2£w'),  though 
it  was  created  mainly  on  account  of  danger  from  enemies, 
was  not  confined  to  military  jurisdiction.  As  in  other 
ancient  nations,  the  deliverer  of  the  people  by  force  of 
arms  from  oppression  or  invasion  was  looked  up  to  as 
arbiter  in  all  sorts  of  civil  difficulties  and  imbroglios. 
This  explains  the  use  of  the  term,  which  literally  means  a 


54  RISE   OF   THE   HEBREW   MONARCHY  BOOK  I 

"regulator  "  or  "adjuster,"  so  that  it  lias  a  real  correspond- 
ence to  the  same  word  (suffef)  as  designating  among 
Phoenician  colonists  one  of  the  supreme  magistrates  in 
their  aristocratic  form  of  popular  government  (§  43).  The 
institution  among  the  Hebrews  answers  nearly  to  the 
"  heroic  dictatorship  "  of  Aristotle.  It  put  the  possibilities 
of  supreme  local  authority  within  the  reach  of  a  single 
man ;  and  the  perpetuation  of  such  power  after  the  danger 
had  passed  away  which  had  called  the  official  into  existence 
in  the  cases  of  several  of  the  Judges,  notably  in  that  of 
Gideon  in  central  Canaan,  shows  how  nearly  the  principle 
of  kingship  came  to  be  recognized.  To  Gideon  himself 
the  kingly  honour  was  in  fact  offered;  and  though  he 
declined  it  both  for  himself  and  his  family,  his  son  Abime- 
lech  ventured  to  appropriate  it.  The  ill  success  of  his 
pretensions,  however,  showed  that  the  people  were  not 
ripe  for  it.  As  being  a  Canaanitic  institution,  it  Avas 
abhorrent  to  the  best  sense  of  the  Hebrews,  especially 
when  it  was  only  locally  and  not  nationally  feasible.  It 
is  significant  that  Abimelech's  brief  reign  was  begun  and 
encouraged  in  a  city  having  still  a  large  Canaanitic  ele- 
ment, which  was  suppressed  in  consequence  of  his  death 
and  failure. 

§  50.  The  second  or  monarchical  stage  of  government 
—  the  goal  at  which  all  the  Semitic  settled  communities 
arrived  —  was  reached  among  the  Hebrews  through  an 
intensifying  and  extension  of  the  same  inward  necessity 
and  external  compulsion  as  had  necessitated  the  heroic 
dictatorship  of  the  Judges.  Each  one  of  these  rulers  had 
stood  for  the  rights  of  his  tribe  or  section  against  local 
invasions  or  incursions,  whether  at  the  hands  of  Moabites, 
Northern  Canaanites,  Midianites,  Ammonites,  or  Philis- 
tines. The  last-named  rivals  of  Israel  had  extruded  a 
whole  tribe  from  its  allotted  territory.  Its  transfer  in  a 
body  to  a  remote  region  in  the  north,  doubtless  with  the 
concurrence  of  all  the  rest  of  Israel,  indicates  the  strength 
of  tribal  cohesion  and  its  conservating  influence,  at  :i  ,.vmi- 


CH.  Ill,  §  51  DANGERS   OF   ANARCHY  55 

paratively  late  date  in  the  epoch  of  the  Judges.  In  the 
second  place,  bitter  intertribal  jealousies  culminating  in 
actual  conflicts,  cruel  and  remorseless,  and  threatening  to 
lead  to  wars  of  extermination,  portended  an  internal 
dissolution  of  the  Hebrew  community,  unless  a  national 
and  patriotic  feeling  could  be  created  strong  enough  to 
overcome  local  rivalries.  A  third  general  condition  was 
working  in  Israel  towards  the  creation  of  an  almost 
universal  sentiment  in  favour  of  the  permanent  centraliza- 
tion of  the  government.  This  was  the  gradual  but  inevi- 
table breaking  up  of  the  communal  system  of  nomadic  life 
under  the  influence  of  agricultural  pursuits.  Communism, 
which  is  often  held  to  have  been  characteristic  of  the 
Israelites  during  most  of  their  residence  in  Canaan,  was 
really  only  possible  for  long  among  the  pastoral  elements 
of  the  population.  Among  the  tillers  of  the  soil  the 
individual  proprietorship  of  the  cultivated  land  soon 
became  a  necessity  of  existence.  But  this  involved  the 
relaxation  of  the  old  tribal  and  clannish  bonds  and  a  rapid 
tendency  towards  the  extreme  opposite  of  the  communistic 
relation  —  an  autonomy  of  the  individual.  Yet  that 
every  man  should  "do  what  was  right  in  his  own  eyes," 
in  the  circumstances  of  the  time  and  people,  could  result 
and  was  felt  to  be  resulting  only  in  social  disorder  and 
the  collapse  of  the  Hebrew  settlement.  What  was  needed 
on  all  grounds  was  a  permanent  "regulator,"  general, 
chief  counsellor,  arbiter.  The  most  urgent  necessity  was 
for  one  who  should  go  forth  with  the  armies  of  Israel 
against  their  enemies ;  and  the  decision  in  favour  of  the 
kingdom  was  finally  reached  when  the  last  and  most 
formidable  of  the  oppressors  of  the  Hebrews  had  brought 
them  to  the  verge  of  destruction,  and  then  a  man  of  the 
popular  heroic  type  was  chosen  by  a  large  section  of  the 
people  as  the  founder  of  the  monarchy. 

§  51.  The  essential  distinction  between  the  "  judge  " 
and  the  "king"  was  hereditary  succession,  inasmuch  as 
the  attribute  of  supreme  power  was  in  either  case  a  matter 


50  POPULAR   CHOICE   OF   A   KING  BOOK  I 

of  gradual  growth  and  could  be  realized  in  the  former 
functionary  as  well  as  in  the  latter.  The  distinction  was 
clearly  put  in  the  case  above  referred  to  (§  49)  when  the 
kingly  dignity  was  offered  to  one  of  the  Judges:  "The 
men  of  Israel  said  unto  Gideon,  Rule  thou  over  us,  both 
thou  and  thy  son  and  thy  son's  son  also:  and  Gideon  said 
unto  them,  I  will  not  rule  over  you,  neither  shall  my  son 
rule  over  you:  Jehovah  shall  rule  over  you"  (Jud.  viii. 
22  f.).  The  gist  of  the  matter  of  the  newly  created  mon- 
archy is  expressed  in  the  persistent  plea  of  the  people  of 
Israel,  disheartened  as  they  were  by  the  defeats  due  to 
disorder  and  disunion  that  seemed  inseparable  from  the 
precarious  dictatorship  of  the  Judges :  "  Nay,  but  we  will 
have  a  king  over  us,  that  we  too  may  be  like  all  the 
nations,  and  that  our  king  may  judge  us,  and  go  out  before 
us  and  fight  our  battles  "  (1  Sam.  viii.  19  f . ;  cf .  5  f.).  They 
still  wanted  a  "judge"  or  "regulator,"  but  he  must  be  a 
permanent  ruler  and  leader  in  war;  and  this  was  to  be 
secured  by  following  the  example  of  the  surrounding 
nations,  among  whom  hereditary  kingship  was  universal. 
I  have  implied  that  the  question  of  the  degree  of  authority 
exerted  by  the  king  was  at  first  a  secondary  one.  This  is 
illustrated  by  the  reception  given  to  the  warnings  of  the 
last  great  Judge  of  Israel,  under  whose  auspices  the 
dictatorship  passed  into  the  monarchy,  when  he  foretold 
to  them  to  what  complexion  the  monarchy  would  come 
at  last  (1  Sam.  viii.  11-18).  The  main  thing  with  the 
people  at  the  time  was  to  have  a  strong  reliable  chieftain 
perpetually  guaranteed.  It  is  accordingly  quite  natural 
that  the  first  king  begins  his  reign  by  exercising  no 
greater  authority  than  did  his  predecessors  among  the 
military  judges ;  after  his  election  as  king  he  retires  to 
his  home  with  his  commission,  ready  to  act  when  an 
emergency  demands  intervention  (1  Sam.  x.  26).  How 
the  hereditary  principle  loyally  adhered  to  became  the 
chief  source  of  stability  and  the  great  conservative  influ- 
ence in  religion,  morals,  and  political  life,  we  shall  see 


CH.  Ill,  §  52         ADVANTAGES   OF   THIS   SYSTEM  57 

fully  illustrated  in  the  succeeding  history  (cf.  §  278); 
as  also  it  will  clearly  appear  how  the  simple  and  unexact- 
ing  rule  of  the  king  chosen  from  among  his  fellows  grew 
in  pomp  and  stringency  as  it  became  gradually  forgotten 
that  the  establishment  of  royalty  had  been  really  a  popular 
movement. 

§  52.  The  advantages  of  a  decentralized  system  based 
upon  such  antecedents  and  traditions,  as  compared  with 
the  Canaanitic  and  the  Babylonian  type  of  monarchical 
development,  were  very  great  as  far  as  the  chief  ends  of 
the  specifically  Hebrew  institutions  were  concerned.  In 
the  first  place,  a  degree  of  local  freedom  and  self-control 
could  be  secured  unknown  in  the  rest  of  the  Semitic  world. 
The  kings,  indeed,  came  to  be  often  harsh  and  exacting, 
but  their  power  Avas  popularly  understood  to  be  practically 
limited  to  the  regulation  of  military  affairs  and  the  raising 
and  control  of  the  revenue.  The  cities,  being  neither 
autonomous  principalities  after  the  Canaanitic  fashion, 
nor  garrisoned  towns  held  in  subjection  by  force  like 
those  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  were  permitted  to  continue 
the  management,  through  their  own  representative  heads, 
of  their  local  affairs  of  business  and  justice,  except  in 
cases  involving  an  appeal  to  the  central  authority.  More- 
over, since  there  went  naturally  with  them  the  villages 
and  the  cultivated  ground  adjacent  to  each,  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  whole  kingdom  was  of  that  simple  prescriptive 
kind  which  admitted  the  peaceful  and  untrammelled  cul- 
tivation and  enjoyment  of  the  religious  and  social  institu- 
tions inherited  from  the  fathers.  It  will  thus  be  readily 
understood  how  abuses  which  arose  in  spite  of  these 
privileges  (cf.  §  56)  —  how  a  departure  from  these  simple 
and  fairly  equalized  conditions  of  living  and  working,  how 
the  creation  of  a  privileged  class  of  the  rich  and  luxurious, 
and  the  centralization  of  government  and  of  political 
influence  generally,  were  always  regarded  by  the  truest 
friends  of  the  Israelitish  commonwealth  as.  especially 
dangerous  to  the  liberties,  as  well  as  to  the  religion  and 


58  OPPORTUNITIES   FOR   EXPANSION  BOOK  I 

morals  of  the  people.  This  wholesome  conservative  prin- 
ciple of  local  and  individual  freedom  was,  moreover,  felt 
to  be  dependent  upon  the  continuance  and  encouragement 
of  domestic  virtues,  and  of  those  pursuits  and  habits  to 
which  the  pastoral  race,  now  become  largely  agricultural, 
naturally  adapted  itself  in  the  land  of  its  permanent  settle- 
ment. The  worst  danger  to  be  apprehended  was  not  the 
enlargement  of  the  royal  prerogative,  but  the  growth  of  a 
class  of  wealthy  and  grasping  magnates  standing  between 
the  common  people  of  the  country  and  the  king.  And 
so  foreign  trade  and  alliances,  and  close  relations  with 
foreign  nations  in  general,  were  dreaded,  as  tending 
to  develop  ambitious  and  luxurious  inclinations  and  to 
unsettle  the  character  of  the  community. 

§  53.  Again,  as  to  the  important  matter  of  capacity  of 
national  growth  and  recuperation,  it  is  obvious  that  the 
Hebraic  communities  were  far  better  able  than  the  individ- 
ual autonomous  cities  of  the  Canaanites,  Aramaeans,  or 
Babylonians,  to  incorporate  into  themselves  neighbouring 
tribes  or  families  by  peaceful  means  and  by  voluntary 
association  on  the  part  of  the  latter.  This  largely  explains 
the  numerical  strength  and  the  steady  growth  and  vitality 
of  the  single  tribe  of  Judah,  situated  as  it  was  on  the 
border  of  that  great  Semitic  breeding-ground,  the  Arabian 
desert.  It  is  true,  on  the  other  hand,  that  these  tribal 
federations,  even  when  organized  kingdoms,  had  greater 
difficulty,  through  the  absence  of  a  strong  central  govern- 
ment, in  securing  and  retaining  large  tracts  of  foreign 
territory  and  holding  outside  nations  in  vassalage,  so  that 
none  of  the  Hebraic  monarchies  ever  came  near  rivalling 
in  extent  and  power  those  kingdoms  whose  central  seats 
were  the  great  cities  on  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates.  But 
this  disadvantage  was,  in  the  case  of  the  Hebrews  proper, 
a  decided  advantage  for  the  fulfilment  of  their  providential 
mission;  since  through  no  other  channel  than  a  self- 
contained,  politically  unambitious,  locally  restricted  com- 
munity, could,  in  the  old  Semitic  times,  the  simple  and 


CH.  Ill,  §  54  SEMITIC   FEDERATIONS  59 

pure  religion  of  Israel  have  been  conserved  and  conveyed 
to  later  generations  of  men  without  destructive  contamina- 
tion from  the  worldly  forces  that  made  for  unrighteousness 
(§  63). 

§  54.  To  return  now  to  the  subject  of  the  Semitic 
states  as  a  whole,  it  will  be  proper  to  say  a  word  upon 
their  capacity  for  voluntary  alliance  and  confederation 
among  themselves.  Their  tendency  to  permanent  sepa- 
rateness,  except  under  compulsion,  has  been  sufficiently 
indicated  in  the  foregoing  paragraphs ;  but  this  must  not 
be  understood  as  excluding  the  possibility  of  leagues  and 
combinations  of  different  sorts,  of  greater  or  less  extent 
and  duration,  and  of  various  degrees  of  closeness.  There 
were,  for  example,  alliances  made  against  common  enemies, 
as  by  the  cities  of  old  Babylonia  against  the  Elamites; 
the  combinations  of  Canaan ites  in  various  groups  against 
the  invading  Israelites ;  the  frequent  alliances  of  Syrian 
and  Palestinian  nations,  cities,  and  tribes  against  the 
power  of  Assyria,  of  which  the  most  general  and  formi- 
dable was  the  league  against  Shalmaneser  II  (§  230)  at 
the  beginning  of  the  epoch  of  interference  with  the  West- 
land.  To  these  may  be  added  the  alliance  of  the  five 
kings  of  the  Salt  Sea  against  the  Elamitic  invasion,  and 
the  federations  of  the  Philistines  formed  at  different 
epochs  for  conquest  and  defence,  before  these  remarkable 
communities  of  immigrants  (§  192)  had  assimilated  them- 
selves completely  to  the  Canaanitic  type  of  government. 
All  of  these,  it  will  be  at  once  understood,  were  merely 
temporary  federations  devised  to  meet  emergencies.  They 
did  not  involve  even  an  approach  to  a  federal  or  legisla- 
tive union.  They  were  simply  based  upon  the  principle 
of  self-preservation,  with  the  reciprocal  understanding 
naturally  existing  among  neighbouring  groups  of  settle- 
ments, usually  claiming  a  common  descent  and  holding 
to  cognate  religions.  They  were,  indeed,  often  formed 
between  communities  that  were  normally  engaged  in 
fighting  one  another,  and  in  any  case  they  were  greatly 


60  ALLIANCES   BASED    OX  VASSALAGE  BOOK  I 

relaxed  or  entirely  broken  immediately  after  the  passing 
away  of  the  common  danger.  The  same  thing  may  be 
said,  as  a  rule,  of  alliances  which  were  not  infrequently 
cemented  by  intermarriages  between  members  of  kingly 
houses. 

§  55.  To  be  sharply  distinguished  from  such  voluntary 
associations,  were  those  alliances  which  were  based  upon 
the  less  stringent  forms  of  vassalage.  It  has  already  been 
mentioned  (§  39)  that  a  subject  state  was  as  a  rule 
expected  to  furnish  a  contingent  to  the  superior  in  support 
of  the  military  enterprises  of  the  latter.  Like  the  pay- 
ment of  tribute,  this  was  made  the  subject  of  a  special 
compact  in  the  articles  of  submission.  We  have  often 
thus  to  explain  the  co-operation  of  states  which  are  seldom 
or  never  found  acting  in  voluntary  concert.  It  is,  for 
example,  an  anomaly  in  Oriental  history  -to  find  Ela- 
mites  and  Babylonians  making  an  expedition  in  com- 
mon, and  the  memorable  instance  of  that  sort  recorded  in 
Gen.  xiv.  is  accounted  for  when  we  remember  that  the 
latter  were  then  under  the  dominion  of  the  former. 
Remarkable  alliances  recorded  in  the  annals  of  the  Hebrews 
between  mortal  enemies,  such  as  those  between  Northern 
Israel  and  the  Aramaeans  of  Damascus,  and  between 
Judah  and  Edom,  may  sometimes  be  thus  explained.  It 
is  evident  that  this  understanding  between  vassals  and 
suzerains,  when  it  was  faithfully  adhered  to,  was  a  very 
effective  instrument  in  the  hands  of  powerful  rulers  for 
preventing  combinations  among  the  lesser  states  and 
securing  their  more  ready  submission.  Even  when  there 
was  no  special  requisition  upon  a  tributary  to  supply  an 
auxiliary  force  for  the  army  of  the  suzerain,  the  offensive 
and  defensive  treat}-  between  them  gave  the  superior  his 
strongest  vantage  ground  for  the  extension  of  his  domin- 
ions. One  instance  may  illustrate  the  political  importance 
of  such  leagues  in  general.  When  Sinacherib  was  under- 
taking the  conquest  of  Palestine,  it  Avas  impossible  for 
Hezekiah  and  the  other  hostile  princes  to  bring  all  the 


CH.  Ill,  §  56  SEMITIC    CENTRALISM  61 

interested  states  into  line  against  the  invader.  Ekron, 
for  example,  the  conquest  of  which  forms  an  important 
episode  in  the  history,  was  one  of  the  principalities  which 
were  under  bonds  to  Assyria.  Its  king  remained  faithful 
to  his  covenant ;  and  though  the  people  of  the  city  were 
willing  to  join  in  the  insurrection,  their  support  could  not 
be  received  till  Hezekiah  had  dethroned  him  and  carried 
him  captive  to  Jerusalem.  It  was  in  fact  mainly  through 
such  conditions  as  these  industriously  brought  about  by 
themselves,  that  the  Great  Kings  were  enabled  to  conquer 
the  whole  of  the  western  lands. 

§  56.  Sufficient  has  now  been  said  to  show  the  lack  of 
permanence  and  solidity  in  almost  all  political  combina- 
tions found  among  the  Semites,  except  those  based  upon 
conquest.  An  explanation  may  now  naturally  be  asked 
of  this  instability  of  the  Semitic  states,  and  of  what,  from 
a  Western  standpoint,  we  may  call  the  political  inaptitude 
of  the  race  generally.  A  partial  proximate  solution  of 
the  question  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  delegated 
power  is  foreign  to  Semitic  notions  and  methods  of 
government.  The  example  of  the  Hebrews  shows  that  it 
was  possible  for  Semitic  nomads,  under  specially  favour- 
able conditions,  to  grow  into  a  nation;  but  while  the 
constituents  of  the  new  monarch  could  make  him  king, 
neither  he  nor  any  one  of  his  successors  knew  how  to  give 
back  to  the  people  in  duly  divided  proportions  the  power 
they  had  conferred.  He  did  not  understand  how  to  admin- 
ister the  affairs  of  his  dominion  as  a  whole,  so  as  to  preserve 
permanently  the  true  and  fair  balance  between  the  supreme 
power,  as  exercised  by  his  representative  officers,  and  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  the  local  authorities  who  were 
properly  responsible  to  the  individual  citizens.  Thus  it 
happened  that  in  this  very  best  example  of  a  Semitic 
nation,  centralism,  so  dreaded  by  the  guardians  of  its 
honour  and  welfare  (§  52),  became  too  strong  for  the 
native  instinct  and  passion  for  individual  and  civic  free- 
dom. Tf  now  we  turn  to  the  most  highly  organized  type 


62  CONTRAST   WITH   ARYAN   SYSTEMS  BOOK  I 

of  Semitic  government,  the  Assyrian  or  Chaldsean  empire, 
we  find  that  the  self-asserted  authority  over  the  subject 
nations  and  provinces,  when  vested  in  representative 
officials  of  one  rank  and  another,  was  not  really  transferred 
to  them  in  any  sense  or  degree;  that  they  were  rather 
instruments  than  agents  or  delegates  of  the  autocratic 
head  of  the  state.  These  functionaries,  for  example,  whose 
titles  we  are  obliged  to  translate  by  "viceroy"  or  "gov- 
ernor," were  not  vested  with  anything  like  the  independent 
authority  wielded  by  a  Roman  prefect  or  even  a  Persian 
satrap,  and  had  little  analogy  with  the  governors  of  a 
modern  British  colony.  The  whole  army  of  administrators, 
of  greater  or  smaller  jurisdiction,  were  appointed  and  main- 
tained chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  looking  after  the  royal 
revenues  and  preserving  the  peace.  The  Assyrian  state 
was  in  its  ordinary  functions  a  great  tax-raising  institution, 
kept  running  by  the  same  military  force  that  had  created 
it.  If  the  Assyrian  despots  had  been  capable  of  relaxing 
the  harshness  of  their  rule  through  power  constitutionally 
delegated  to  representatives  in  the  subject  states,  as  was 
done  by  their  successors,  the  Persian  monarchs,  the  his- 
tory of  Western  Asia  might  have  been  very  different. 
I  need  only  recall  the  deportations  and  captivities  of 
Israel  and  Judah  and  contrast  them  with  the  measures 
proclaimed  in  the  proclamation  of  Cyrus  and  with  the 
mild  rule  of  the  Tirshatha,  to  show  the  historical  bearings 
of  the  conditions  just  described.  For  though  the  Persians 
did  not  advance  beyond  the  Asiatic  or  what  Aristotle  calls 
the  "barbaric  stage  of  monarchy;"  and  though  unlike  the 
self-governing  communities  of  Greece  and  Rome  they  gave 
the  people  no  share  in  the  work  of  government,  yet  it  was 
an  unspeakable  boon  to  Western  Asia  that  their  conquerors 
knew  how  to  relax  the  severity  of  despotic  rule  by  divid- 
ing its  force  in  the  operations  of  government  and  thus 
diminishing  its  pressure. 

§  57.     I  have  attempted  to  give  a  superficial  explana- 
tion of  the  comparative  failure  of  political   institutions 


CH.  Ill,  §  57     KINGS   THE   REGEXTS   OF   THE   GODS  63 

among  the  ancient  Semites.  To  account  fully  for  the 
phenomenon,  that  a  race  otherwise  so  highly  gifted  should 
come  short  in  this  respect,  would  be  impossible  without  a 
summation  of  the  results  of  an  inquiry  into  their  history. 
But  it  is  proper  here  to  cite  one  main  and  thoroughgoing 
principle  of  the  Semitic  conception  of  the  world  and  of 
society,  which  may  go  far  towards  clearing  up  the  diffi- 
culties of  the  question.  I  mean  the  belief  universally 
cherished  by  the  race  that  the  Deity  is  the  real  actor  or 
agent  in  human  affairs,  and  that  men  who  are  under  due 
subordination  to  the  Deity  or  in  harmony  with  his  purposes 
are  the  proper  instruments  of  his  will.  Applied  to  the 
sphere  of  government,  it  means  that  the  Semitic  rulers 
regarded  themselves  as  being  merely  .the  vicegerents  of 
the  gods.  Now  as  each  community  among  the  Semites 
was  originally  an  aggregation  of  people  bound  together 
not  primarily  by  political  but  by  religious  bonds,  that  is 
to  say,  by  the  possession  of  certain  beliefs  and  the  worship 
of  certain  divinities  (§  30),  it  followed  that  whatever 
rulers  came  to  administer  its  affairs  believed  that  in 
their  actions,  and  in  theirs  alone,  the  will  of  the  gods  was 
being  executed.  This  fundamental  notion  was  encouraged 
rather  than  depreciated  by  the  development  of  the  primi- 
tive communities  into  independent  monarchies ;  and  the 
greater  the  power  and  influence  exercised  by  any  ruler, 
the  more  reasonable  and  judicious  was  the  custom,  uni- 
versal with  Semitic  monarchs,  of  ascribing  all  their 
achievements  and  merits  to  the  patronage  and  inspiration 
of  their  favourite  divinities.  The  elaborate  setting  forth 
of  their  close  relations  with  the  deities  of  the  land,  and  of 
their  commission  as  the  ministers  and  favourites  of  Asshur, 
Bel,  Nebo,  and  the  other  members  of  the  pantheon,  which 
forms  the  stereotyped  introduction  for  a  thousand  years 
and  more  to  the  royal  annals  of  Babylon  and  Assyria,  and 
which  at  first  sight  seems  infinitely  absurd,  as  a  very 
delirium  of  vainglory,  is  thus  easily  and  naturally 
accounted  for.  A  specimen  phrase  such  as  the  following: 


64  DIVINE  AGENCY  NOT  DELEGATED  BOOK  I 

"  The  god  Adar,  the  giver  of  the  sceptre  and  of  judgment 
to  all  and  every  city"  (AN.  I.  4),  helps  one  to  under- 
stand how  divided  or  delegated  power  was  to  these  typical 
Semitic  rulers  a  thing  impossible.  When  we  look  more 
closely  at  the  origin  and  growth  of  this  phase  of  the  divine 
right  of  kings,  we  get  a  clearer  view  still  of  the  whole 
matter.  Each  independent  state  had  for  its  chief  one  who 
was  head  of  the  ruling  family  (§  36).  As  the  representa- 
tive of  his  god  or  gods,  he  fulfilled  the  function  of  priest 
as  well  as  king,  offering  sacrifices  as  well  as  judging  and 
ruling.  Thus  we  find  that  the  earliest  kings  of  Assyria 
bore  a  title  which  means  "  a  sacrificer  "  (§172),  and  that  the 
later  monarchs  retained  the  title  as  well  as  the  function, 
so  that  a  puissant  ruler  of  the  ninth  century  B.C.  boasts 
that  his  priestly  office  was  established  forever  by  the 
divine  oracles  (AN.  I.  25).  Just  so  was  it  with  Melchi- 
zedek,  the  priest-king  of  old  Jerusalem;  and  we  find  the 
same  tendency  manifested  in  theocratic  Israel  in  the  case 
of  Saul  at  Gilgal  (1  Sam.  xiii.  8  ff.).  Again,  one  of  the 
chief  practical  functions  of  Semitic  rulers  was  to  extend 
the  sway  of  their  patron  deities;  and  as  this  was  mainly 
accomplished  through  military  conquest,  it  followed  that 
the  king  as  the  representative  of  his  gods  could  not 
delegate  his  function  even  as  a  winner  of  victories  to  any 
subordinate.  Accordingly,  while  a  commander-in-chief  of 
the  army  under  the  sovereign  was  a  necessary  officer  of  the 
state,  it  was  not  expected  that  he  would  claim  any  suc- 
cesses for  himself.  Thus  the  Assyrian  annals  ascribe  the 
conduct  of  campaigns,  the  plans  of  battles,  and  the  subju- 
gation of  hostile  territory,  exclusively  to  the  monarch,  who 
is  also  represented  as  the  author  of  the  records,  which  as 
a  rule  profess  to  commemorate  his  achievements  alone. 
For  the  sake  of  comparison,  I  may  cite  the  case  of  David's 
general,  who  was  so  scrupulously  careful  not  to  take  to 
himself  any  of  the  glory  of  the  conquest  of  the  capital  of 
Ammon,  that  he  insisted  on  having  the  king  present  as  a 
matter  of  form  at  the  final  assault  (2  Sam.  xii.  26  ff.). 


CH.  Ill,  §  59       RELIGION  THE   POLITICAL   BASIS  66 

§  58.  Inasmuch  as  politics  and  religion  were  so 
inseparably  intertwined  in  the  history  of  the  Semitic 
peoples,  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  point  out  more  fully  what 
has  already  been  frequently  suggested,  that  religion  fur- 
nished the  fundamental  unifying  and  dividing  principle 
among  their  various  communities.  Language  and  race 
were  in  comparison  things  entirely  secondary.  All  the 
Semites  knew,  even  from  their  cognate  types  of  language, 
that  they  were  originally  of  one  common  stock ;  and  yet 
some  of  the  most  bitter  and  bloody  wars  that  ever  cursed 
the  earth  were  waged  between  Semitic  peoples  fully  con- 
scious of  their  kinship.  The  lines  of  demarkation  were 
drawn,  just  as  in  the  early  communities  of  Greece  and 
Italy,  by  worship  and  ceremonial.  The  very  existence  of 
a  nation,  as  well  as  its  power  for  self-defence  and  aggres- 
sion, was  felt  to  be  dependent  on  its  solidarity  with  its 
god  (see  2  K.  xviii.  22;  cf.  1  K.  xx.  23,  28).  The  same 
general  fact  is  indicated  in  current  phrases  (Ruth  i.  16; 
1  Sam.  xxvi.  19),  which  imply  that  a  transfer  of  residence 
to  a  foreign  country  involves  the  adoption  of  another  god. 
The  notion  of  special  proprietorship  in  certain  gods  was 
carried  so  far  that  a  people  transplanted  to  a  strange  terri- 
tory was  not  expected  to  prosper  unless  they  adopted  the 
"god  of  the  land  "  (2  K.  xvii.  26  ff.).  A  full  appreciation 
of  these  and  kindred  facts  is  the  master-key  to  the  chief 
problems  of  Semitic  life  and  history. 

§  59.  Thus  the  mutual  obligation  of  worship  and 
protection  between  the  people  and  their  national  god  was 
one  of  the  chief  bonds  of  union  in  every  Semitic  com- 
munity. But  we  have  here,  as  well  as  in  other  ancient 
races,  the  paradox  that  in  most  Semitic  states,  along  with 
the  deities  with  whom  the  national  worship  was  mainly 
associated,  other  gods  Avere  often  recognized  and  honoured. 
In  other  words,  we  find  here  not  only  a  popular  but  a  state 
polytheistic  system,  whose  complexity  is  bewildering  and 
whose  origin  is  somewhat  obscure.  There  can  be  no 
doubt,  however,  about  the  underlying  principles  and  ante- 


66  LOCAL   AND   NATIONAL   GODS  BOOK  I 

ceclent  processes,  and  these  may  be  understood  without  a 
special  inquiry  into  the  ultimate  origin  of  polytheistic 
worship.  The  beginning  was  made  in  the  growth  of  local 
cults.  Each  community,  in  the  first  place,  came  by  imper- 
ceptible degrees  to  promote  to  the  rank  of  gods  certain  of 
the  beneficent  demons  which  form  the  object  of  primitive 
fear  and  reverence,  or  the  transfigured  ghosts  of  buried 
ancestors  or  of  departed  tribal  heroes.  Next,  for  various 
reasons,  but  chiefly,  we  may  presume,  from  motives  of 
gratitude  for  favours  granted  in  answer  to  prayer,  one  of  the 
gods  was  exalted  above  the  rest  and  gradually  promoted  to 
be  the  patron  deity  of  the  community.  As  the  rudimentary 
state  developed,  surviving  the  shock  of  war,  aggrandizing 
itself  continually,  and  consolidating  its  internal  resources, 
this  tutelary  god  became  invested  with  a  still  greater 
prestige ;  and  though  the  divinity  of  the  deities  of  rival 
nations  was  not  disputed,  he  was  held  to  be  unquestionably 
pre-eminent  above  them  all.  Thus  we  find  Melkart  among 
the  Phoenicians  (whose  very  name,  "King  of  the  City," 
suggests  the  history  of  his  election),  Milcom  among  the 
Ammonites,  Chemosh  among  the  Moabites,  Rimmon 
(Hadad)  in  Damascus,  Nebo  in  Babylon,  Asshur  in 
Assyria.  But  in  addition  to  these  supremely  honoured 
local  deities,  there  were  others  which  may  be  called 
ethnical  divinities,  whose  worship  was  perpetuated  b}^  all 
the  leading  families  of  the  race.  Thus  there  were  among 
the  Semites  the  male  and  female  personifications  of  the 
powers  of  nature,  Baal  and  Ishtar  (Ashtoreth),  whose 
worship  was  established  among  all  the  tribes  before  their 
division.  The  result  of  such  a  duality  was  that,  as  among 
the  Canaanites,  the  cult  of  Baal  might  largely  supersede 
that  of  the  local  gods ;  or,  as  in  Babylon  and  Assyria,  it 
might  be  kept  up  concurrently  with  that  of  other  deities ; 
or  it  might  be  continued  under  the  name  of  a  different 
god,  whose  attributes  were  so  similar  to  those  of  Baal  that 
they  were  confounded  in  the  popular  mind  and  the  two 
deities  were  merged  into  one.  This  may  serve  to  explain 


CH.  Ill,  §  61         SIGNIFICANCE    OF    SYNCRETISM  67 

in  most  cases  the  rise  and  growth  of  the  worship  of  single 
national  gods. 

§  60.  The  multiplicity  of  deities  obtaining  in  some 
portions  of  the  Semitic  world  is  to  be  accounted  for  by 
this  consideration:  adherence  to  a  certain  god  being  an 
indication  of  national  unity  and  simplicity  of  origin,  the 
worship  of  a  number  of  deities  within  the  same  state  is  a 
token  of  political  complexity  and  of  a  fusion  of  communi- 
ties. Thus  the  bewildering  syncretism  of  the  Babylonian 
and  Assyrian  pantheons  corresponds  exactly  to  the  fortunes 
of  those  countries,  where  endless  changes  had  taken  place 
in  the  political  relations  of  the  constituent  elements  of  the 
state.  We  may  contrast  with  this  the  simplicity  of  the 
cults  of  the  nations  of  the  West-land.  Yet  even  here 
the  syncretism  of  Jehovah  and  Baal  suggests  to  us  the 
possibility  and  naturalness  of  federations  of  gods,  where 
two  or  more  communities  intermingle  with  one  another. 
From  anything  like  a  multiform  syncretism  Syria  and 
Palestine  were  preserved  simply  by  the  fact  of  the  long- 
continued  independence  of  their  many  petty  nations.  On 
the  other  hand,  since  extension  by  conquest  was  the  rule  in 
Semitic  political  history,  the  huge  pantheon  of  the  As- 
syrians with  Asshur  at  the  head  indicates  the  forcible 
annexation  of  a  large  number  of  communities  by  the  state 
of  which  Asshur  was  the  national  god. 

§  61.  We  can  now  perceive  how  throughout  the  Se- 
mitic realm  it  was  a  principle,  grounded  in  the  habits  and 
beliefs  of  the  race  and  universally  recognized,  that  the 
predominance  of  any  one  community  over  another  involved 
the  superior  rank  of  the  national  god  of  the  more  powerful 
state.  Hence  the  worship  and  status  of  the  vanquished 
deity  might  be  degraded  even  to  obliteration  by  his  abase- 
ment beneath  his  successful  rival.  In  short,  a  contest 
between  two  communities  involved,  or  rather  implied,  a 
contest  between  their  respective  gods.  In  practice,  how- 
ever, the  result  of  defeat  and  humiliation  in  war  was  not 
the  absolute  dethronement  of  the  unfortunate  divinity,  or 


68  CONSERVING   FORCE   OF   RELIGION  BOOK  I 

the  abolition  of  his  worship.  Apart  from  the  obvious 
political  considerations  which  interfered  to  prevent  this, 
there  operated  above  all  the  belief  above  alluded  to,  that 
the  land  itself,  and  even  each  physical  division  of  it,  —  that 
is,  the  very  soil  itself  (see  2  K.  v.  17), — had  its  own  proper 
god,  and  that  his  recognition  and  service  were  an  indis- 
pensable condition  of  prosperity  to  its  inhabitants.  Prac- 
tically, then,  it  was  the  general  rule  that  each  conquered 
nation,  whether  allowed  to  remain  in  vassalage  or  incor- 
porated into  the  empire  of  the  conqueror,  continued  to 
retain  the  worship  of  its  own  deities  with,  of  course,  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  superior  power  and  sanctity  of 
the  gods  who  had  proved  their  pre-eminence  by  their 
victories.  This  explains,  for  example,  the  occurrence  in 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  of  long  lists  of  gods  worshipped 
in  various  portions  of  the  Assyrian  dominions,  along  with 
the  names  of  the  nationality  or  district  where  each  was 
worshipped.  There  were  but  two  conditions  which  were 
regarded  as  ipso  facto  putting  an  end  to  a  local  and  national 
cult:  the  actual  extinction  of  the  people  of  the  land,  or 
its  dispersion  or  deportation  to  distant  regions,  where  it 
would  be  compelled  to  "serve  other  gods."  It  was  its 
religious  bearing  which  gave  to  this  drastic  and  far- 
reaching  policy  of  breaking  up  and  transplanting  rebellious 
nations  its  chief  terrors  in  the  hands  of  the  Assyrians. 
To  put  the  whole  matter  briefly:  religion  was  the  chief 
means  of  perpetuating  distinct  nationality,  as  it  formed 
and  fixed  the  bonds  of  union  among  clans  and  tribes  and 
growing  states ;  and  when  the  military  principle  came  to 
determine  the  permanent  and  perhaps  higher  political 
order  in  each  empire  which  it  created,  religion  still 
limited  and  classified  the  elements  of  the  population, 
which  would  otherwise  have  been  fused  into  one  homo- 
geneous people.  Fidelity  to  the  national  gods,  their  rites, 
and  their  sanctuaries,  was  synonymous  with  patriotism; 
and  with  the  entire  crushing  out  of  nationality  in  any  form 
there  came  the  obliteration  of  the  national  worship.  Thus 


CH.  Ill,  §  62  THE   RELIGION   OF   ISRAEL  69 

for  instance,  the  old  religion  became  extinct  in  Samaria, 
because  the  priests  had  been  deported  after  the  destruction 
of  the  city,  doubtless  with  a  view  to  preventing  the  revival 
of  patriotic  feeling  among  the  remaining  inhabitants ;  and 
it  was  only  because  the  foreign  colonists  found  it  necessary 
to  learn  "  the  manner  of  the  god  of  the  land  "  (cf .  §  58) 
that  the  discredited  cult  was  reintroduced,  and  this  was 
permitted  to  be  done  only  under  the  meanest  possible 
auspices  (2  K.  xvii.  27  ff.).  So  also  the  worship  of 
Jehovah  was  impossible  to  the  poor  people  of  the  land  who 
were  left  in  Judah  after  the  final  deportation  under 
Nebuchadrezzar,  without  the  temple  or  the  priesthood  or 
any  other  of  the  symbols  of  the  religion  of  Israel ;  while 
after  the  return,  even  the  erection  of  an  altar  as  the  first 
step  in  religious  rehabilitation,  was  sufficient  to  put  heart 
and  hope  into  the  feeble  band  of  patriots  (Ezra  iii.  3). 

§  62.  Such  in  barest  and  most  imperfect  outline  were 
the  genius  and  practice  of  the  ancient  Semites  in  the 
supreme  indivisible  sphere  of  religion  and  politics.  It  is 
most  instructive  for  the  purposes  of  this  inquiry  to  supple- 
ment what  has  just  been  said  by  noting  how  the  true  relig- 
ion, as  professed  in  ancient  Israel,  diverged  from  the 
general  type.  It  is  significant  that  even  when  it  was 
most  imperfectly  understood  and  practised,  its  votaries 
signalized  its  inherent  superiority  to  all  other  forms  of 
religion  by  ignoring,  in  their  fidelity  and  devotion  to  it, 
the  principles  universally  accepted  by  their  race  and  in 
their  time.  Change  of  place  and  circumstances,  which 
among  the  rest  of  the  Semites  worked  havoc  with  the 
national  beliefs  and  customs,  did  not  compel  the  wandering 
tribes  of  the  Hebrews  to  discard  Jehovah.  The  settlement 
in  a  new  country  indeed  brought  about  the  inevitable 
syncretism  of  faith  and  worship;  and  it  might  seem, 
according  to  Semitic  analogy  (§  58),  as  though  even  in 
spite  of  military  inferiority  the  local  religion  would  gain 
the  day;  yet  in  the  long  contest  between  Jehovah  and 
"the  god  of  the  land"  Baal  was  finally  overthrown. 


70  THE   HEBREW  MONARCHY   A   NATION          BOOK  I 

Even  a  casual  and  so  to  speak  incidental  movement  in  a 
rude  unenlightened  community  illustrates  the  persistence 
and  tenacity  of  the  faith  of  Israel.  It  was  genuinely 
Semitic  that  the  tribe  of  Dan  in  their  northern  migration 
should  make  their  settlement  under  the  auspices  of  relig- 
ion; but  it  was  truly  Israelitish  that  they  should  take 
their  own  priest  with  them  and  introduce  into  their  new 
home  their  own  ancestral  worship  (Jud.  xvii.,  xviii.). 
To  pass  over  intervening  illustrations,  the  convincing 
proof  of  the  unique  character  and  standing  of  the  religion 
of  the  Hebrews  is  afforded  by  its  fate  during  and  after 
the  long  Babylonish  captivity.  As  has  been  said  (§  61), 
deportation  and  exile  were  intended  to,  and  actually  did 
in  other  instances,  effect  the  annihilation  of  the  national 
religion.  But  the  faith  of  Israel  was  stronger  than  the 
genius  of  Semitism;  it  overcame  the  cramping,  stifling 
influences  of  its  habitual  environment;  it  broke  with  the 
traditions  of  the  race,  and  even  with  the  bias  of  its  own 
inveterate  habit,  and  returned  from  its  long  banishment 
out  of  Jehovah's  land  stronger,  more  earnest,  and  purer 
than  ever  before. 

§  63.  In  singular  and  yet  most  significant  correspon- 
dence with  the  religious  superiority  of  Israel  over  its  kin- 
dred, is  the  fact  that  the  Hebrew  monarchy  was  the  only 
one  of  the  Semitic  communities  which  realized  anything 
like  the  true  idea  of  a  nation.  In  spite  of  its  limitations, 
its  remains  of  tribal  rudeness  and  barbarism,  its  internal 
troubles,  its  frequent  disloyalty  to  its  theoretic  ideal,  the 
united  kingdom,  as  well  as  its  legitimate  successor  the 
kingdom  of  Judah,  had  still  within  it  the  main  element 
of  a  durable  nation  —  a  degree  of  individual  freedom,  a 
sense  of  justice  and  of  equal  rights  for  all,  elsewhere 
unknown,  and  a  steady  outlook  towards  a  wider  national 
future  and  a  boundless  destiny.  They  were  a  "people," 
as  no  other  nation  was,  because  they  were  and  knew 
themselves  to  be,  "the  people  of  the  living  God."  Nor 
should  we  forget  that  this  very  form  of  a  "nation,"  into 


CH.  Ill,  §  64    THE   THREE   LEADING   COMMUNITIES  71 

which  this  people  was  providentially  moulded,  was  the 
only  one  which  could  conserve  the  spirit  of  their  great  tra- 
ditions and  form  the  depository  as  well  as  the  perpetuating 
agency  of  truths  vital  to  the  welfare  of  humanity.  Apart 
from  the  question  of  monotheism  as  contrasted  with  poly- 
theism, of  a  soul-elevating  religion  as  contrasted  with  de- 
grading idolatries,  it  must  be  admitted  that  the  Hebrew 
nation  itself  was  constituted  after  the  only  fashion  that 
was  possible  to  a  state  which  should  subserve  the  great 
ends  for  which  it  was  organized.  A  single  huge  city  of  the 
old  Canaanitic  Mesopotamian  or  Babylonian  type,  or  the 
fluctuating  confederacies  of  the  Phoenician  towns  with 
their  aristocracy  of  wealth,  or  the  heterogeneous  empires 
of  the  Assyrians  and  Chaldseans,  sustained  only  by  the 
force  and  energy  which  had  created  them,  could  never 
have  become  the  outward  vehicle  for  the  transmission 
and  perpetuation  of  the  moral  and  spiritual  truths  which 
were  to  reorganize  the  world  into  one  people  whose  God 
is  the  Lord.  Such  a  mission  was,  and  could  only  be, 
assigned  to  the  nation  of  Israel,  insignificant  as  was  its 
territory  and  its  political  influence  among  the  peoples  of 
the  earth  (cf.  §  53). 

§  64.  It  has  incidentally  appeared  in  the  foregoing 
review  of  the  political  and  religious  characteristics  of  the 
ancient  Semites  that  the  three  representative  systems  of 
government  prevailing  among  them  were  respectively 
those  of  the  Assyrian  and  Chaldsean  empires,  the  Phoeni- 
cian commercial  cities  with  their  colonies,  and  the  Hebrew 
commonwealth  or  nation.  It  should  here  be  added  that 
these  were  also  the  three  communities  of  most  importance 
to  the  world,  each  in  its  own  special  way.  This  does  not 
belittle  the  part  played  by  the  Aramaeans,  whose  services 
consisted  in  acting  as  carriers  and  intermediaries  between 
the  East  and  the  West,  and  as  bearers  of  civilization  far 
and  wide  from  the  Tigris  to  the  shores  of  the  -^Egean. 
Their  lack  of  corporate  unity  on  anything  like  a  large 
scale  and  of  distinctive  outstanding  political  and  social 


72  THE  BABYLONIANS  AND   ASSYRIANS  BOOK  I 

institutions  left  them  outside  of  the  class  of  world-moving 
peoples.  Turning  now  to  the  three  leading  divisions, 
and  looking  at  their  characteristic  endowments  and  the 
parts  assigned  to  each  of  them  by  Providence,  we  cannot 
but  be  impressed  by  their  several  achievements,  so  vast 
and  far-reaching  were  they  in  their  range  and  conse- 
quences. 

§  65.  To  the  ancient  Babylonians  must  be  awarded  the 
merit  of  having  made  the  beginnings  in  exact  science, 
which,  when  conveyed  westward  by  the  Aramaeans  were 
given  over  to  the  still  more  gifted  and  practical  Greeks 
for  the  use  of  coming  ages.  And  even  if  it  must  be  said 
of  their  astronomical  observations  which,  five  thousand 
years  ago,  they  carried  to  a  high  degree  of  accuracy,  that 
they  were  made  primarily  in  the  interest  of  a  most  super- 
stitious system  of  astrology,  that  does  not  detract  from  its 
usefulness  or  ultimate  importance  to  mankind.  Nor  can 
love  of  science  be  denied  to  them  as  the  first  geographers, 
chronologers,  and  grammarians  of  the  world.  What  they 
dreamed  of  and  realized  in  the  way  of  foreign  conquest 
we  pass  by  here,  because  in  this  they  wefre  so  far  exceeded, 
during  most  of  their  common  history,  by  their  more  vigor- 
ous offshoot,  the  Assyrians.  In  this  people  we  see  an 
extraordinary  development  of  the  military  spirit  and  of 
the  lust  of  power.  Retaining  and  cultivating  of  Babylo- 
nian science  and  literature  only  what  subserved  their 
material  ends,  they  made  it  their  aim  to  found  and  per- 
petuate an  empire  which  should  control  all  the  internal 
trade  of  the  Semitic  lands  and  lay  their  foreign  commerce 
under  tribute,  which  should  subject  to  themselves  all 
peoples  of  the  Semitic  realm,  the  nations  beyond  to  the 
north  and  east,  and  the  empire  of  the  Nile  itself.  And 
what  they  succeeded  in  doing  is,  from  the  standpoint  of 
previous  achievement,  wonderful  indeed,  however  much 
we  may  be  repelled  by  the  records  of  their  deeds  of  cruelty, 
and  of  their  pride  and  rapacity.  For  a  period  as  long 
as  that  during  which  Rome  ruled  its  own  greater  world, 


CH.  Ill,  §  66  THE   PHOENICIANS  73 

they  maintained  their  control  over  the  prosperous  and  fer- 
tile lands  that  stretched  from  the  mountains  of  Persia  to 
the  Mediterranean,  and  broke  up  the  confederacies  of 
the  northern  nations  by  a  force  of  energy  unparalleled  as 
it  was  remorseless. 

§  66.  No  less  wonderful  and  far-reaching  were  the 
achievements  of  the  Phoenicians.  They  did  their  share 
by  maritime  as  the  Aramaeans  did  by  inland  communica- 
tion, in  conveying  the  products  of  Babylonian  and  Meso- 
potamian  culture  to  the  Greeks,  and  thus  to  the  later 
European  world.  But  this  was  only  an  incidental  part 
of  their  larger  services  to  civilization  and  human  progress. 
They  penetrated  unknown  seas  with  an  enterprise  and 
courage  unsurpassed  by  Columbus  or  Drake.  They  cir- 
cumnavigated Africa.  They  worked  mines  in  Spain  and 
England.  If  the  Assyrians  conceived  the  idea  of  a  uni- 
versal empire,  they  with  more  originality  and  success 
formed  and  realized  the  idea  of  a  world-wide  commerce. 
Semites  though  they  were,  they  developed  a  trade  and 
acquired  a  knowlege  of  the  earth  and  man  that  were  truly 
Indo-European,  as  their  wide-spread  sails  (Ezek.  xxvii. 
7;  Is.  Ix.  8  f.)  bore  them  from  the  coasts  of  Cornwall  and 
Sierra  Leone  in  the  West,  along  the  stormy  Atlantic  and 
through  the  Pillars  of  Hercules  to  their  home  ports  in  the 
mart  of  nations;  from  the  coasts  of  Malabar  in  the  East 
to  the  Red  Sea  ports,  which  they  alone  knew  how  to  util- 
ize ;  or  through  the  Persian  Gulf  to  the  cities  of  Baby- 
lonia. They  taught  international  trade  and  navigation 
to  the  Greeks  and  then  to  the  Romans.  When  the  great- 
est of  the  Romans  brought  the  seaboard  and  the  islands 
of  the  Atlantic  within  reach  of  the  Mediterranean  by 
overland  routes,  he  was  but  building  on  the  knowledge 
put  at  the  disposal  of  the  civilized  world  by  the  Phoeni- 
cians a  thousand  years  before.  If  their  great  commercial 
colonies  finalhr  succumbed  to  the  power  of  Aryan  nations, 
it  must  be  remembered  that  the  surviving  empires  only 
reached  their  gigantic  stature  by  climbing  on  the  shoulders 


74  HEBREWS  AND  PHOENICIANS  BOOK  I 

of  these  Semitic  adventurers.  Not  only  were  the  Phoe- 
nicians the  originators  of  a  world-wide  trade  and  of  a  far- 
sighted  commercial  policy  unrivalled  in  ancient  times, 
but  their  maritime  supremacy  has  been  the  most  enduring 
known  to  men.  Even  that  of  Britain  has  not  yet  lasted 
one -fourth  as  long. 

§  67.  It  remains  now  to  sum  up  the  services  of  the 
Hebrews  as  the  third  of  the  most  important  branches  of 
the  North-Semitic  family.  When  we  try  to  say  in  what 
way  the  Hebrews  were  a  "great"  people,  we  must  use 
the  term  in  an  entirely  different  sense  from  that  in  which 
we  employ  it  of  the  kindred  nations.  They  were  great 
simply  in  this,  that  they  were  the  people  through  whom 
the  true  religion  was  revealed  to  men,  and  in  whose  lives 
and  teachings  it  was  illustrated  for  the  saving  and  guiding 
of  our  race.  Compared  with  the  Phoenicians,  their  near 
neighbours,  they  were  circumscribed  and  provincial.  Of 
the  business  1  and  politics,  and  natural  features  and  prod- 
ucts of  the  great  far-stretching  outside  world,  they  for 
many  ages  learned  almost  entirely  at  second-hand  from 
the  travelling  merchants  that  passed  along  their  borders. 
Of  mechanical  or  constructive  skill  they  had  but  little. 
Stately  buildings  were  rare  among  them,  and  these  were 
erected  of  materials  drawn  from  Phoenician  territory  and 
under  the  superintendence  of  Phoenician  architects.  In 
their  most  prosperous  times  they  were  poor  as  compared 
with  the  "traffickers  who  were  among  the  honourable  of 
the  earth,"  and  their  meagre  occasional  foreign  trade  was 
done  in  Phoenician  bottoms.  A  Tyrian  chronicler,  in 
referring  to  Israel  and  Judah,  would  think  them  worthy 
of  mention  only  because  they  furnished  slaves  for  their 
galleys  and  foreign  plantations,  and  "  little  dues  of  wheat 
and  wine  and  oil"  for  their  tables  (Ezra  iii.  7).  But 

1  The  absence  of  foreign  trade  -was  not,  however,  due  to  the  lack  of 
the  commercial  instinct.  Whenever  they  became  strong  politically  they 
went  into  commerce  with  a  will  (cf.  §  206,  231,  254,  2G9),  even  when 
they  had  to  employ  Phoenician  ships  and  seamen. 


CH.  Ill,  §  69  HEBREWS   AND   ASSYRIANS  75 

their  very  poverty  and   simplicity  were    the   conditions 
of  their  elevation  above  and  deliverance  from  the  moral 
and  religious  conceptions  and  practices  of  the  Canaanites. 
The  introduction  of  foreign  art  (Is.  ii.  16)  as  well  as  of 
foreign  luxury  were  symptoms  and  forerunners  of  decline 
in  that  which  alone  could  make  them  strong  and  enduring. 
§  68.    Still  more  striking   and   significant  is  the  con- 
trast between  Israel  and  the  dual  civilization  of  Babylonia 
and  Assyria.     To  the  Assyrian  annalists  the   kingdoms 
of  Israel  and  Judah  are  petty  communities,  easily  reduced 
to  submission,  and  only  mentioned  as  among  the  minor 
principalities  of  the  West  which  had  to  be  chastised  for 
refusal  of  tribute  or  destroyed  for  final  revolt,  and  whose 
ambassadors  bearing  propitiatory  gifts  added  another  to 
the  hundreds  of  scenes  depicting  the  triumph  of  the  "  king 
of  kings  "  among  the  sculptures  that  adorned  his  gorgeous 
palaces.     If  their  chief  fortresses  were  of  consequence,  it 
was  because  they  furnished  a  safeguard  against  Egypt  and 
a  vantage-ground  for  the  control  of  the  great  coast-road 
with  its  traffic,  in  whose  profits  the  Hebrews  themselves 
could  not  participate.     During   the   times    of    Assyrian 
supremacy  Israel  was  divided  and  shorn  of  its  strength, 
often    dependent    on    foreign    alliances    for   self-preser- 
vation against  much  lesser  foes  than    Assyria,   without 
prestige   among   the   nations,    diplomatically   weak    and 
territorially  insignificant.       Even  at   the   height   of   its 
power  it  was  only  relatively  great  in  the  worldly  sense, 
in  comparison  with  the  petty  neighbouring  states  of  Pales- 
tine and  Syria.     At  no  time  did  its  territory,  including 
tributary  lands,  extend  to  more  than  one-twentieth  of  the 
widest  limits  of  the  Assyrian  or  ChakUean  empire ;  and 
Judah,  before  Sinacherib's  invasion,  —  the  crisis  that  best 
indicated  the  source  of  its  real  greatness  alongside  of  its 
political  inferiority,  — was  less  than  one  hundred  times  as 
large  as  the  realm  of  the  warrior  king  who  wasted  and 
depopulated  the  country  up  to  the  gates  of  Jerusalem. 
§  69.    Again,  as  compared  with  Babylonia  of  the  old 


76  HEBREWS   AND   BABYLONIANS  BOOK  I 

or  of  the  new  era,  how  petty,  how  narrow,  and  how  unin- 
teresting does  Israel  appear!  With  none  of  that  artistic 
taste  and  talent  to  which  the  exhumed  cities  of  the  Lower 
Euphrates  perpetually  bear  witness  in  behalf  of  their 
ancient  inhabitants,  with  no  industrial  activity,  with  no 
scientific  notions  or  inventions,  the  insignificance  of 
Israel  would  seem  to  be  almost  ridiculous  for  a  nation 
that  has  been  so  much  in  men's  thoughts  and  on  men's 
lips  since  it  vanished  from  its  stage  of  action.  The  liter- 
ature of  Israel,  too,  is  small  over  against  the  comparatively 
little  which  has  been  so  far  brought  to  light  illustrating 
the  many-sided  intellectual  activity  of  the  dwellers  by 
the  Rivers.  It  is  also  narrower  in  range.  But  though 
practically  devoted  to  but  one  subject,  it  rises  higher,  and 
is  finer  and  truer  and  more  profound  and  more  human 
than  the  literature  of  Babylon  or  of  any  other  people  in 
the  old  world  or  in  the  new.  If  on  this  single  point  of 
intellectual  and  moral  achievement  Israel  has  surpassed 
its  conquerors,  it  is  just  because  the  literature  of  Israel 
was  so  one-sided  or,  of  you  will,  so  narrow ;  and  because 
it  was  at  the  same  time  the  expression  of  that  which  was 
at  once  the  strength  and  the  glory  of  Israel  —  its  hardly 
won  divinely  imbued  religious  faith,  its  knowledge  and 
recognition  of  the  living  God.  Surely  the  people  whom 
alone  he  knew  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth  is,  in  this 
very  contrast  to  its  despoilers,  the  very  best  proof  which 
the  history  of  the  nations  affords,  that  God  hath  chosen 
the  weak  things  of  the  world  to  confound  the  mighty. 


BOOK  II 

THE  BABYLONIANS 
CHAPTER  I 

EARLIEST     INHABITANTS     OF     BABYLONIA,    THEIR     ENVI- 
RONMENT, AND   THEIR    CIVILIZATION 

§  70.  WE  shall  now  endeavour  to  get  a  clear  and  exact 
idea  of  the  relations  sustained  by  Israel  to  those  other 
states  of  Western  Asia  that  modified  or  determined  its 
fortunes.  It  is,  therefore,  in  order  to  pass  from  the  gen- 
eral survey  of  their  political,  social,  and  religious  charac- 
teristics which  has  been  so  far  occupying  our  attention,  to 
an  inquiry  into  the  course  of  their  historic  development. 
The  first  essential  to  a  right  apprehension  of  our  subject 
is  a  just  historical  perspective.  The  student  who  makes, 
for  example,  the  Old  Testament  his  starting-point,  and 
to  whom  the  narrative  there  given  of  the  origin  and  devel- 
opment of  the  Hebrew  nation  comprises  almost  the  total 
of  his  knowledge  of  the  Semitic  peoples,  as  well  as  the 
centre  of  his  historical  interest,  must  become  familiar 
with  the  fact  that  the  national  existence  of  Israel  is 
ancient  only  in  a  relative  sense.  Compared  with  the 
history  of  Athens  or  Rome  or  Persia,  its  earlier  portions 
may  be  called  fairly  ancient,  but  in  comparison  with  the 
rise  of  the  Babylonian  kingdoms,  it  is  rather  to  be  called 
modern.  The  obscurity  that  involves  the  early  times  of 
Western  Asia  is  first  pierced  by  the  light  that  breaks  in 


78  BABYLONIA   AND   ITS   RIVERS  BOOK  II 

upon  it  from  the  East,  the  scene  of  man's  creation  and 
the  seat  of  the  earliest  civilizations;  and  though  the  rays 
are  rare  and  scattered,  and  reach  only  a  little  way,  leaving 
long  tracts  of  time  unillumined,  yet  we  know  that  three 
empires,  each  of  them  lasting  for  hundreds  of  years,  had 
risen,  flourished,  and  fallen  in  Babylonia,  while  the  rest 
of  Western  Asia  was  as  yet  politically  unorganized,  and 
before  the  the  ancestor  of  the  Israelites  had  left  his  native 
Ur  of  the  Chaldees.  It  will  be  most  proper  then  to  begin 
by  giving  an  outline  account  of  early  Babylonia,  leaving 
untouched  for  a  time  the  western  region  which  contained 
the  Land  of  Promise. 

§  71.  The  Babylonians  were  thus  the  first  of  the 
Semites  to  enter  the  arena  of  history,  and  they  did  so  by 
virtue  of  the  civilization  to  which  they  attained  in  and 
through  their  settlements  on  the  Lower  Euphrates  and 
Tigris.  Let  us  look  at  the  great  river  system  terminating 
in  this  memorable  plain.1  The  Euphrates  is  formed  by 
the  union  of  two  main  branches,  one  of  which  rises  near 
Erzerum  in  Armenia  and  follows  a  southwesterly  course, 
while  the  other  and  longer,  rising  one  hundred  and 
twenty  miles  east,  at  the  foot  of  Mount  Ararat,  runs 
nearly  due  west.  The  large  river,  the  resultant  of  their 
union,  after  winding  deviously  among  the  most  easterly 
peaks  of  Taurus,  keeps  up  a  southwesterly  course  in  its 
descent  from  the  great  mountain  range  till  at  a  point 
eighty  miles  from  the  Mediterranean  Sea  it  turns  sud- 
denly southward  and  enters  upon  a  second  stage  of  its 
course  which  wre  may  properly  call  the  Mesopotamian.  A 
thought  here  suggests  itself  spontaneously:  How  differ- 
ent would  the  history  of  the  world  have  been  if  Northern 
Syria  instead  of  rising  had  declined  from  Taurus  to  the 
coast,  and  the  life-giving  waters  of  the  River  had  been 
diverted  into  the  sea,  away  from  the  Mesopotamian  plain 


1  Cf.  Art.  "Mesopotamia"  in  Encycl.  Brit,  by  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson  ; 
Rawlinson's  Five  Great  Monarchies,  vol.  i,  p.  1-16 ;  Hommel,GBA.  p.  180  ff. 


CH.  I,  §  71  COURSE   OF  THE    EUPHRATES  79 

and  the  Babylonian  lowlands !  After  this  decisive  change 
of  direction  it  moves  southward  for  about  seventy  miles, 
gradually  decreasing  its  speed  and  losing  the  character  of 
a  mountain  stream.  It  next  bends  suddenly  eastward, 
and  then  flows  southeast  by  east,  with  two  main  deflec- 
tions in  a  due  easterly  direction,  the  latter  of  which  brings 
it  within  twenty-five  miles  of  the  Tigris.  During  the 
first  third  of  this  Mesopotamian  section,  it  passes  through 
cultivated  and  populated  territory,  but  as  it  moves  south- 
eastward it  becomes  more  and  more  a  desert  stream  border- 
ing here  and  there  on  pasture  grounds  to  which  it  lends 
fertility,  and  having  on  its  banks  small  trading  towns  at 
long  intervals,  and  more  frequent  encampments  of  shep- 
herds. In  the  old  days,  the  upper  portion  at  least,  on  the 
borders  of  Northern  Syria  and  Mesopotamia,  was  far  richer 
and  more  populous  and  better  cultivated  than  at  present. 
While  yet  among  the  mountains,  both  of  the  branches  of 
the  river  and  the  single  stream  receive  many  feeders,  but 
after  leaving  the  highlands  its  waters  are  augmented 
by  only  three  tributaries  of  any  consequence,  the  last  of 
which,  the  Chaboras  (*l"Cn,  Assyr.  Habur^),  coming  due 
south,  bisecting  the  great  Mesopotamian  plain,  formed, 
even  in  ancient  times,  the  practical  limit  of  the  culti- 
vated area.  Naturally,  it  gradually  becomes  an  alluvial 
stream  as  it  proceeds  along  the  plain,  and  when  it  ap- 
proaches the  Tigris,  its  volume,  in  spite  of  its  tributaries, 
is  much  smaller  than  near  the  mountains.  The  last  sec- 
tion is  the  shortest  but  most  important.  From  the  point 
of  close  approach  to  the  Tigris  opposite  Baghdad,  it  runs 
for  a  time  a  parallel  course  with  that  river,  the  smallest 
interval  being  only  twenty-two  miles.  It  flows  at  first 
southeasterly,  and  then  again  nearly  easterly,  till  it  joins 
the  Tigris  about  fifty  miles  from  the  Persian  Gulf.  Its 
total  course,  according  to  Chesney,  is  1780  miles.  In  the 
whole  lower  part  of  its  course  it  receives  no  tributary,  and 
loses  water  steadily,  not  only  through  absorption  by  the 
soil,  but  through  irrigating  canals  which  branch  off  from 


80  COURSE   AND   CHARACTER  OF  THE   TIGRIS     BOOK  II 

it.  The  Tigris  is  a  shorter  and  swifter  stream  of  1146 
miles  in  length,  and  averaging  in  velocity  two  yards  in  a 
second.  It  rises  not  far  from  Diarbekr,  on  the  sloping 
plateau  formed  by  the  junction  of  the  two  prolongations 
of  the  Taurus  Range  known  anciently  as  Masius  and 
Niphates,  and  only  three  miles  from  the  Euphrates  towards 
the  end  of  the  mountain  course  of  the  latter.  It  flows 
easterly  till  it  breaks  through  Mount  Masius  and  enters 
the  modern  Kurdistan.  In  passing  Mosul  (Nineveh)  it 
has  a  southerly  direction  which  it  retains  for  two-thirds 
of  the  remainder  of  its  journey,  with,  however,  in  general 
a  slight  easterly  inclination.  After  its  parallel  course 
with  the  Euphrates,  it  trends  eastward  till  the  sister 
streams  are  ninety  miles  apart.  Then  they  converge  by 
slow  degrees  till  their  final  union  is  accomplished  mainly 
by  means  of  the  eastward  sweep  of  the  Euphrates.  .After 
this  the  common  stream  moves  on  sluggishly  for  about 
sixty-five  miles  further  to  the  Persian  Gulf.  In  the  days 
of  the  ancient  Babylonian  empires  the  two  rivers  entered 
the  Gulf  by  separate  channels,  the  soil  formed  by  the  de- 
posits of  these  rivers  and  of  the  smaller  streams  descend- 
ing from  Elam  having  encroached  enormously  upon  the 
sea  (Par.  174  ff.). 

§  72.  As  the  chief  of  the  factors  of  ancient  civilization, 
it  is  difficult  to  overrate  the  importance  of  these  rivers  in 
their  twofold  use  for  irrigation  and  navigation.  Of  the 
two,  the  Tigris  is  the  more  navigable.  As  it  skirts  moun- 
tainous territory  during  the  greater  part  of  its  descent,  it 
has  more  numerous  tributaries  than  the  Euphrates,  and 
though  narrower,  it  is  deeper,  being  better  held  together 
by  its  banks.  Its  waters  also  are  less  absorbed  by  the 
soil  during  most  of  its  course,  and  it  is  less  drained  by 
canals.  Accordingly,  it  sends  a  larger  volume  of  water 
into  the  common  estuary,  and  bears  vessels  of  greater  size, 
the  peculiar  construction  of  which,  in  Assyrian  times,  is 
exhibited  on  sculptured  monuments.  In  addition,  the  Eu- 
phrates has  the  disadvantage  of  numerous  shallows  and 


CH.  I,  §  72  NAVIGATION   AND    IRRIGATION  81 

sand-banks.  But  this  deficiency  in  its  navigability  was 
made  up  by  the  digging  of  numerous  canals  from  one  im- 
portant centre  of  traffic  to  another,  branching  off  from  the 
Euphrates,  and  either  ultimately  joining  it  again,  or  con- 
ducted over  to  the  Tigris.  By  this  means  the  whole  coun- 
try, from  the  point  of  approach  of  the  rivers  southwards, 
was  covered  with  a  network  of  canals,  many  of  them  of 
first-class  importance  in  inland  trade,  and  all  of  them  of 
the  utmost  utility  in  irrigation.  The  unrivalled  fertility 
of  the  soil  of  Babylonia  was  the  result  not  only  of  the  qual- 
ity of  the  soil,  but  of  the  superadded  benefits  of  the  colossal 
system  of  drainage  and  canalization  which  was  begun  by 
the  ingenuity  of  the  first  civilized  inhabitants.  Of  the 
natural  elements  of  fertility,  the  Euphrates  contributed 
by  far  the  larger  share.  From  the  early  part  of  its  course 
it  brings  down  large  quantities  of  limestone  washings  and 
other  detritus,  which  it  deposits  all  along  its  winding 
way  through  the  Mesopotamian  plain.  The  spring  and 
autumn  inundations,  carrying  up  the  water  far  above  the 
normal  height  of  the  river  bank,  distribute  these  waters 
over  the  desert,  where  it  mingles  with  the  sand  of  the 
former  seashore.  The  resulting  formations  of  clay,  mud, 
and  gypsum,  comprising  elements  of  the  richest  soil,  are 
found  in  such  profusion  in  Babylonia  that  in  the  days  of 
ancient  civilization  it  was  the  most  fruitful  portion  of  the 
whole  earth  with  the  possible  exception  of  the  valley  of 
the  Nile.  It  was  roughly  reckoned  by  Herodotus  to  equal 
in  productiveness  half  the  rest  of  Asia.  But  this  wonder- 
ful fertility  was  not  gained  from  the  land  as  nature  had 
formed  it.  The  result  of  the  inundations  was  that  im- 
mense pools  of  water  and  long  stretches  of  marshy  ground 
(Is.  xxxv.  7,  xlii.  15  a/.)  were  formed,  rendering  a  large 
portion  even  of  the  immediate  basin  of  the  Great  River  a 
barren  waste.  Not  only  by  the  canals  just  mentioned, 
but  by  large  reservoirs,  such  as  that  close  to  Sippar.  into 
which  Cyrus  turned  the  course  of  the  Euphrates  before 
the  capture  of  Babylon,  the  redundant  waters  were  drained 


82  LIMITS   OF   BABYLONIA  BOOK  II 

off  or  stored  up  for  distribution  through  smaller  channels 
in  the  times  of  low  water  in  the  river.  Some  of  the  great 
canals  conveyed  the  superfluous  water  to  the  Persian  Gulf, 
and  others  to  the  Tigris,  whose  deeper  bed  and  higher 
banks  could  retain  the  additional  supply.  Lower  down 
on  the  Tigris,  again,  where  the  soil  and  river-bed  were 
more  like  those  of  the  Euphrates,  the  overflowing  water 
was  conducted  back  by  similar  canals  to  the  depleted  bed 
of  the  latter.  Thus  it  is  not  difficult  to  understand  how 
such  epithets  as  "the  life  of  the  land,"  "the  bringer  of 
plenty,"  were  applied  by  the  ancient  inhabitants  to  the 
two  Rivers. 

§  73.  Such,  in  general,  was  the  character  of  the  country 
and  soil  of  Lower  Mesopotamia  and  Babylonia.  The  de- 
scription may  serve  at  the  same  time  to  define  the  limits 
of  ancient  Babylonia.  The  great  system  of  canaliza- 
tion, which  can  even  yet  be  in  large  measure  traced  on 
the  surface  of  the  country,  virtually  covered  the  whole  of 
the  territory  included  between  the  basins  of  the  rivers 
and  stretching  from  a  little  north  of  Baghdad  (or  Lat. 
33^-°  N.)  for  about  two  hundred  and  forty  miles  to  the 
Gulf,  and  corresponding  nearly  to  the  modern  Irak-Arabi. 
Such  was  ancient  Babylonia  proper,  the  greater  portion  of 
which,  or  the  highly  cultivated  territory,  naturally  fell 
under  the  dominion  of  the  most  powerful  city  (§  35), 
which  during  most  of  the  historical  period  was  the  city  of 
Babylon  or  Babel.  In  remoter  times  other  cities,  as  we 
shall  see,  wielded,  in  succession,  an  important  though 
less  extensive  sway.  But  during  the  whole  of  the  ancient 
periods  until  the  times  of  the  Assyrian  conquest  and  the 
later  Chaldsean  empire,  the  extent  of  the  consolidated 
monarchy  was  very  various,  depending  mainly  upon  the 
ability  of  the  nomadic  tribes  which  occupied  the  grazing 
grounds  along  the  rivers,  and  the  semi-barbarous  princi- 
palities bordering  on  the  Gulf,  to  maintain  their  inde- 
pendence of  the  aggressive  central  power.  Very  variable, 
also,  in  the  period  of  Babylonian  independence,  was  the 


CH.  I,  §  74  EXTENT   OF   ASSYRIA  83 

northern  boundary  between  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  ac- 
cording as  the  former  or  the  latter  kingdom  happened  to  be 
predominant.  We  shall  only  add  in  this  connection  that 
the  region  from  the  point  of  closest  convergence  of  the 
Rivers  southwards,  is,  according  to  Genesis  iii.,  the  scene 
of  the  creation  of  man,  the  country  of  Eden. 

§  74.  The  dwelling-place  of  that  great  community 
which  was  most  closely  allied  to  that  of  the  Babylonians 
lay  much  farther  north,  upon  the  banks  of  the  Tigris. 
Assyria  was  a  name  used  by  the  ancients  in  the  vaguest 
fashion,  sometimes  including  Babylonia,  and  sometimes 
being  made  to  extend  to  the  Euphrates  westward,  or  even 
to  the  Mediterranean.  The  want  of  definiteness  is  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  name  was  variously  applied  by  the 
Assyrians  themselves.  In  its  widest  extent  it  included 
the  territorial  acquisitions  of  the  later  empire ;  or  again, 
it  included  the  nucleus  of  the  great  dominion,  that  is,  the 
kingdom  of  Assyria  proper;  or  finally,  it  was  applied  to 
the  city  from  which  the  monarchy  took  its  name,  and 
which  was  the  starting-point  of  the  Assyrian  nation. 
The  city  of  Asshur,  however,  lay  near  the  southern  ex- 
tremity of  Assyria  proper,  and  being  the  settlement  in 
which  the  colonists  from  Babylonia  first  established 
themselves  as  a  distinct  nationality,  it  gave  its  name  to 
the  whole  subsequent  expansion  of  the  people.  The  dis- 
trict which  we  have  just  called  the  Assyrian  kingdom, 
as  distinguished  from  the  Assyrian  empire,  was  a  compact 
little  territory  on  the  upper  part  of  the  Middle  Tigris. 
The  Lower  Zab  was  regarded  as  its  southern  boundary ; 
and  it  extended  thence  northward  as  far  as  the  mountains 
of  Kurdistan  (Mount  Zagros).  It  was  formed  principally 
of  settlements  which  grew  up  in  the  fertile  valleys  of  the 
tributaries  that  flow  from  the  mountains  southward  and 
westward  into  the  Tigris.  The  marked  difference  between 
the  middle  course  of  the  Euphrates  and  that  of  the  Tigris 
has  already  been  pointed  out.  The  fact  that  the  latter 
river  skirts  the  mountains  during  this  portion  of  its  jour- 


84  MESOPOTAMIA   PROPER  BOOK  II 

ney  accounts  for  the  number  and  fulness  of  its  feeders, 
as  contrasted  with  the  scanty  contributions  received  by 
the  Euphrates.  Numerous  tributaries,  large  and  small, 
of  which  the  principal  was  the  Upper  Zab,  issuing  from 
spurs  of  the  Zagros  Range,  furnished  those  elements  of 
fertility  and  attractiveness  which  drew  the  people  of 
Asshur  further  north  from  their  earliest  seats  to  their 
permanent  settlement.  It  was  only  the  eastern  side  of 
the  river  which  was  thus  highly  favoured,  and  but  little 
of  the  west  side  was  included  in  the  land  of  Asshur.  The 
country  thus  defined  was  about  one  hundred  and  twenty 
miles  long  by  eighty  broad,  and  two-thirds  of  it  was  hilly 
or  mountainous.  Its  productiveness  was  very  great,  jus- 
tifying the  praise  bestowed  upon  it  by  the  legate  of 
Sinacherib  (2  K.  xviii.  32),  by  Asshurbanipal,  the  last  of 
its  great  kings,1  and  b}T  classical  writers.  The  kernel 
of  the  country  was  the  complex  of  cities  of  which,  in  the 
imperial  days  of  Assyria,  Nineveh  was  the  chief,  and 
which  are  described  in  Gen.  x.  12  as  "the  great  city." 

§  75.  Reference  was  made  above  (§  71)  to  the  River 
Habur  (Chaboras)  as  the  last  of  the  tributaries  of  the 
Euphrates.  The  territory  lying  between  it  and  the  Great 
River  westward  was  the  seat  of  the  third  of  the  great 
Semitic  settlements  which  grew  up  within  the  system  of 
the  two  Rivers.  This  is  Mesopotamia  proper,  or  Aram 
Naharaim,  or  Padan-Aram  of  the  book  of  Genesis,  a  coun- 
try whose  history,  if  it  could  be  written,  would  rival  in 
interest  that  of  almost  any  portion  of  Asia.  Of  this 
region,  the  district  lying  between  the  next  tributary  to 
the  west,  the  River  Balih  (Belich),  and  the  Euphrates 
was  of  chief  importance,  as  being  the  meeting  place  of 
the  great  trade  routes  that  led  from  Babylonia  and  Assyria 
in  the  east,  Asia  Minor  and  Cappadocia  in  the  north- 
west and  north,  the  Hettite  communities  in  the  near 
neighbourhood  over  the  River,  and  Damascus,  Phoenicia, 
Egypt,  and  Arabia  in  the  remoter  south  and  southwest. 

1  V  R.  1,  41  ff. 


CH.  I,  §  70  ARAMAEAN  SETTLEMENTS  85 

The  principal  inhabitants  of  this  territory  were  the  Ara- 
maeans. Their  chief  city  from  very  ancient  times  was 
Harran  (the  "High-way"  city,  Haran),  one  of  the  most 
busy,  populous,  and  frequented  towns  of  all  antiquity. 
This  region  was  the  converging  point  of  the  northwest- 
ward migrations  of  the  Aramaeans,  and  contained  the 
immemorial  seats  of  their  civilization  "beyond  the  River." 
As  the  least  capable  of  all  the  Semites  of  political  unifi- 
cation and  expansion,  they  founded  here  no  extensive 
empire.  They  had,  however,  petty  kingdoms  along  the 
southern  and  eastern  bends  of  the  Euphrates  and  the 
Lower  Belich,  and  they  formed,  at  least  in  historic  times, 
the  chief  element  in  the  population  of  the  great  commer- 
cial cities.  It  is  impossible  to  treat  the  history  of  any 
of  their  communities  separately.  Combinations  such  as 
that  which  subjected  a  part  of  Palestine  in  the  twelfth 
century  B.C.  (§  188)  were  extremely  rare.  After  the 
rise  of  the  Assyrian  power,  one  settlement  after  another 
became  tributary  or  annexed  to  that  empire,  adding 
greatly  to  its  wealth,  and  giving  it  the  central  position 
of  vantage  among  the  tribes  of  Western  Asia.  The  popu- 
lation, however,  remained  permanently  Aramaean  in  its 
controlling  elements,  so  that  even  for  several  centuries 
after  Christ  it  was  possible  to  maintain  an  Aramaean 
kingdom  with  Edessa  as  the  capital.  Flourishing  towns, 
of  which  Nisibis  was  the  chief,  lay  to  the  east  of  the 
River  settlement,  and  these  owed  their  importance  to 
their  position  along  the  trade  route  between  the  Tigris 
and  Euphrates. 

§  76.  In  a  broad  sense  the  total  history  of  the  settle- 
ments on  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  may  be  called  Baby- 
lonian. Assyria  was  an  offshoot  of  the  Southern  com- 
munity, and  its  history,  viewed  as  a  part  of  the  great 
drama  enacted  in  the  cradle-land  of  humanity,  must  be 
looked  upon  as  an  episode  in  a  much  longer  and  more 
eventful  story,  which  began  two  thousand  years  before  the 
founding  of  Nineveh,  and  reached  its  catastrophe  after 


86  PERIODS   OF    BABYLONIAN   HISTORY  BOOK  II 

Assyria  was  blotted  out  from  among  the  nations.  More- 
over, the  main  motives  and  forces  of  the  action  were  drawn 
from  Babylonia,  where  also  took  place  the  final  dSnoue- 
ment.  Thus  there  might  seem  to  be  a  certain  justification 
in  treating  the  history  of  both  regions  as  one  great  whole. 
A  closer  view,  however,  shows  this  to  be  impossible.  The 
colonists  who  settled  on  the  Tigris  soon  established  their 
independence  of  the  mother  land,  and  thenceforward  to 
the  close  of  their  national  existence  they  were  practically 
a  separate  people,  often,  indeed,  holding  the  parent  state 
in  subjection,  and  even  forming  it  into  an  Assyrian  prov- 
ince. True,  there  was  always  in  both  states  the  con- 
sciousness of  identity  of  origin,  of  similarity  of  institu- 
tions, and  the  possession  of  a  common  literature ;  and  the 
later  Babylonian  kings,  after  the  fall  of  Nineveh,  regarded 
the  famous  monarchs  of  Assyria  as  their  predecessors  in 
the  regal  succession.1  The  same  feeling  of  kinship  led  to 
the  attempt  to  construct  a  common  history  of  both  nations 
in  the  early  Assyrian  times.  But  this  work,  compiled 
for  diplomatic  purposes,  was  naturally  little  more  than  a 
series  of  synchronisms;  and  such  must  be  the  essential 
character  of  any  modern  essay  with  the  same  intent. 

§  77.  The  Semitic  regime  in  Babylonia  lasted  appar- 
ently at  least  four  thousand  years.  It  may  be  divided 
into  two  main  portions,  — the  history  of  separate  princi- 
palities with  one  city  after  another  dominating  the  rest, 
and  the  history  of  a  united  monarchy  under  the  hegemony 
of  the  city  of  Babylon.  The  first  great  period  may  be 
roughly  divided  at  points  where  the  cities  of  the  southern 
part  of  the  whole  country  and  those  of  the  northern  form 
two  separate  communities  each  under  the  lead  of  its  most 
powerful  city.  The  second  great  division,  that  of  the 
supremacy  of  the  city  of  Babylon,  may  be  separated  into 
four  periods  or  stages :  (1)  a  period  of  independence ; 

(2)  a  series  of  subjugations  by  foreign  non-Semitic  tribes ; 

(3)  next  a  long  term  of  rivalry  with  Assyria,  ending  in 

1  V  R.  64  col.  II,  48  ff.  (Nabonidus). 


CH.  I,  §  79         DIVISIONS  OF  ASSYRIAN   HISTORY  87 

subjugation  to  the  latter;  and  (4)  finally,  a  brief  term  of 
unparalleled  power  and  splendour  under  the  new  empire 
of  the  Chaldseans,  giving  place  to  rapid  decline  and  the 
conquest  by  Cyrus,  —  an  event  which  at  the  same  time 
abolished  the  rule  and  rOle  of  the  Northern  Semites. 

§  78.  The  history  of  Assyria  extends  over  about  fifteen 
hundred  years.  While  much  briefer  than  that  of  Baby- 
lonia, it  is  also  less  chequered  by  national  humiliation 
and  foreign  domination.  It  is  difficult  to  divide  it,  so 
uniform  (and  one  may  add,  so  monotonous)  was  its  gen- 
eral character,  and  so  consistent  and  unvarying  the  policy 
of  its  rulers  to  subdue  and  spoil  all  the  nations  (Isa.  x. 
7;  Nah.  ii.  11  f . ;  iii.  16  f.).  It  is  possible,  however,  to 
distinguish  three  periods  of  very  unequal  length.  The 
first  of  these  includes  the  early  struggle  for  existence 
and  independence.  The  second  is  marked  by  alternating 
successes  and  failures  in  carrying  out  the  traditional 
policy  of  foreign  conquest,  while,  as  regards  the  rela- 
tions with  the  mother  country,  there  prevailed  an  active 
rivalry,  breaking  out  as  the  state  grew  older  into  frequent 
hostilities,  in  which  the  younger  empire  was  usually  vic- 
torious. The  third  division,  beginning  in  745  B.C.,  is 
introduced  by  the  adoption  of  a  new  and  thorough-going 
policy  of  subjugation,  and  is  distinguished  by  an  almost 
unbroken  series  of  successes  till  the  summit  of  power  was 
reached.  This  was  followed  a  few  years  later  by  a  sudden 
collapse  under  the  force  of  a  combination  of  two  new 
nations,  the  Median  and  the  Chaldean,  the  one  the  first 
of  the  Aryans,  the  other  the  last  of  the  Semites  to  rule 
in  Western  Asia. 

§  79.  The  rise  of  the  Semites  in  Babylonia,  like  all 
other  origins,  is  involved  in  obscurity.  The  earliest 
authentic  records,  drawn  as  they  are  from  their  own  mon- 
uments, reveal  this  gifted  race  as  already  in  possession  of 
a  high  degree  of  civilization,  with  completed  systems  of 
national  religion,  a  language  already  long  past  its  forma- 
tive period,  and  a  stage  of  advancement  in  art  that  testifies 


88  ORIGIN   OF   BABYLONIAN   CULTURE  BOOK  II 

to  the  existence  of  a  wealthy  class  of  taste  and  leisure,  to 
whom  their  nomadic  ancestry  must  have  been  little  more 
than  a  vague  tradition.  The  same  records  also  show  this 
Semitic  people  to  have  extended  their  sway  in  Western 
Asia  as  far  as  the  Mediterranean  coastland  many  centuries 
before  Phoenicians  or  Hebrews  or  Hettites  came  before  the 
world  in  any  national  or  corporate  form.  Questions  of 
deep  interest  arise  in  connection  with  such  facts  as  these. 
It  is  asked:  Did  the  Babylonian  Semites  develop  the  ele- 
ments of  their  civilization  alone,  or  did  they  inherit  that 
of  another  race?  Were  they  the  first  people  to  reclaim 
and  cultivate  the  marshy,  reedy :  plains  of  the  lower  River 
region,  and  make  them  the  garden  of  the  world?  Did 
they  invent  for  themselves  the  arts  of  writing,  of  measur- 
ing and  marking  off  terrestrial  and  celestial  spaces,  of 
navigation  and  elaborate  architecture?  Did  they  dis- 
cover, unaided  from  without,  the  first  principles  of  mathe- 
matics, lay  the  foundations  of  the  science  of  astronomy, 
reckon  time  by  long  and  short  periods,  and  devise  their 
own  system  of  chronology?  The  answer  to  most  of  these 
questions  should  apparently  be  affirmative,  as  far  as  our 
present  light  enables  us  to  answer  at  all.  From  their 
own  records  at  least  we  get  no  hint  that  the  Semitic 
Babylonians  were  indebted  to  any  other  race  for  any  of 
these  attainments.  They  tell  us,  indeed,  of  tribes  and 
nations  such  as  the  Elamites  and  Kasshites,  who  in  later 
or  more  remote  days  became  involved  with  them  politically. 
But  what  we  can  learn  of  these  peoples  shows  them  to 
have  been  far  behind  the  Semites  in  civilization ;  and  to 
assume  for  an  extinct  people  of  a  race  kindred  to  them  an 
earlier  stage  of  more  advanced  culture  would  be  without 
warrant.  In  the  absence  of  direct  evidence  to  the  con- 
trary, we  are  entitled  to  assume  that  the  same  race  who- 
in  historical  times  gave  proof  of  high  mental  endowments 


1  Cf.  the  ideographic  name  of  Sumer  (§  110)  Ki-en  gi,  i.e.  "region  of 
reeds." 


CH.  I,  §  80  THE    SUMERIAN   THEORY  89 

reached  their  unique  level  of  intellectual  attainment  by  a 
process  of  self-education. 

§  80.  A  contrary  opinion  is  held  by  many  scholars  of 
high  rank.  I  refer  to  the  well-known  theory  that  the 
Semitic  Babylonians  acquired  their  civilization  from 
another  people  who  preceded  them  in  the  occupation  and 
cultivation  of  the  country.  This  hypothetical  race  is 
named  Sumerian  from  the  term  Sumer,  generally,  but 
erroneously,  supposed  to  be  a  designation  of  Southern 
Babylonia  (see  §  110  f.).  With  this  in  the  Inscriptions 
is  coupled  the  name  of  Akkad,  another  geographical  term 
properly  connoting  Northern  Babylonia.  This  appella- 
tion has  given  rise  to  the  name  "Akkadian,"  used  by 
most  of  these  modern  authorities  to  designate  a  supposed 
subdivision  of  the  same  people,  speaking  a  dialect  of  the 
main  Sumerian  language.  *  It  is  impossible  here  to  go 
into  this  vexed  subject  at  length.  The  general  bearing 
of  the  evidence  and  a  brief  estimate  of  its  value  will, 
however,  have  to  be  given,  as  the  question  is  so  funda- 
mental and  far-reaching.  The  most  plausible  evidence 
offered  is  partly  palseographic  and  partly  linguistic.  It 
is  claimed  that  the  cuneiform  system  of  writing  histori- 
cally employed  by  the  Babylonians  is  not  of  such  a  kind 
as  Semites  would  have  devised  for  a  language  so  peculiar 
in  structure  as  theirs ;  more  particularly  that  the  sounds 
of  Semitic  Babylonian  are  not  adequately  represented,  and 
also  not  sufficiently  distinguished  by  the  phonetic  signs 
of  the  cuneiform  system.  Further,  it  is  asserted  that  the 
phonetic  values  of  these  same  signs  which,  as  being  de- 
rived from  ideograms,  must  have  been  originally  words 
or  names  for  things  and  ideas,  do  not  represent  Semitic 
Babylonian  words,  and  therefore  that  they  must  have 
been  vocables  of  another  type  of  speech.  Such  an  idiom 
must,  of  course,  have  been  the  one  spoken  by  the  in- 
ventors of  the  system  of  writing,  who  were  consequently 
non-Semitic  in  race.  Against  these  conclusions  it  may 
properly  be  urged,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  cuneiform 


90  ARGUMENTS   FROM   SIGNS   AXD   WORDS        BOOK  II 

alphabet  (or  syllable  list)  does  as  a  matter  of  fact  repre- 
sent fully  and  distinguish  fairly  well  the  sounds  peculiar 
to  Semitic  Babylonian,  while  on  the  other  hand,  if  the 
theory  be  true,  we  have  presented  to  us  the  astounding 
phenomenon  of  a  language  of  an  entirely  different  type  of 
structure  possessing  virtually  the  same  set  of  quite  pecul- 
iar sounds  distinctive  of  the  Semitic  family  of  speech.  A 
somewhat  similar  phenomenon  revealed  in  the  ancient 
Egyptian  language  is  generally  explained  on  the  assump- 
tion of  a  Semitic  substratum  in  the  people  and  civilization 
of  the  Nile  Valley,  particularly  as  actual  linguistic  affini- 
ties between  the  Semitic  and  Egyptian  languages  are  not 
wanting ;  but  no  Sumerianist  has  as  yet  ventured  to  claim 
kinship  with  the  Semitic  for  his  linguistic  foundling. 
As  to  the  second  argument,  based  on  the  phonetic  values 
of  these  sound-signs,  it  has  ag^fin,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  been 
proved  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  them  are  modifica- 
tions, in  one  form  and  another,  of  genuine  Semitic  Baby- 
lonian words,  and  the  list  of  such  identifications  is  being 
continually  increased. 

§  81.  Apparently  more  but  really  less  formidable  is  the 
evidence  adduced  to  prove  the  existence  of  an  actual, 
consistent,  organized  non-Semitic  language,  of  which  the 
cuneiform  signs  were  the  original  vehicle  of  expression. 
It  happens  that  among  the  documents  unearthed  from  out 
of  the  buried  intellectual  treasures  of  Babylonia  and 
Assyria,  a  large  number  of  word-lists  are  found  giving  a 
twofold,  and  sometimes  a  threefold,  explanation  of  the 
cuneiform  ideograms  or  word-signs,  which  were  currently 
employed  along  with  a  phonetic  system  of  writing  in  the 
same  documents  in  all  stages  of  the  language.  One  of 
such  sets  of  explanations  consists  of  plain  and  easily 
recognized  Semitic  words,  while  the  other  set  or  sets  are 
for  the  most  part  strange  in  sound  and  structure,  and 
therefore  supposed  to  be  of  foreign  origin.  But  a  close 
examination  of  these  alleged  foreign  vocables  shows  that 
in  many  cases  they  are  common  Semitic  words  slightly 


CH.  I,  §  82         DOCUMENTS   AND  WORKS   OF   ART  91 

altered,  and  that  in  the  majority  of  the  remaining  in- 
stances they  are  made  up  of  actual  or  possible  word-forms 
of  the  same  idiom  more  or  less  disguised  according  to 
methods  for  the  most  part  easily  ascertainable.  Again, 
one  may  cite,  on  the  Sumerian  side,  the  existence  of  a  very 
large  number  of  lengthy  connected  documents  which  at 
first  sight  seem  to  be  composed  in  the  same  hypothetical 
idiom.  Some  of  these  are  accompanied  by  an  explanation 
(a  supposed  translation)  in  ordinary  Semitic  Babylonian, 
while  others  are  without  such  an  aid  to  their  interpre- 
tation. But  here  also  there  are  marks  of  Semitic  handi- 
work both  numerous  and  palpable.  These  compositions, 
whether  of  the  supposed  bilingual  class  or  unilingual, 
are  not  only  replete  with  such  disguised  Semitic  words  as 
have  been  just  alluded  to,  but  —  what  is  far  more  signifi- 
cant —  they  abound  in  Semitic  grammatical  constructions 
and  modes  of  thought,  and  that  in  the  very  oldest  of  the 
documents,  belonging  to  a  time  when,  it  was  once  sup- 
posed by  Surnerianists,  no  Semitic  Babylonians  existed 
at  all. 

§  82.  Subsidiary  evidence  of  various  kinds  has  been 
offered  in  support  of  the  "  Sumerian  "  theory,  notably  that 
afforded  by  a  few  small  sculptured  figures  thought  to  rep- 
resent the  type  of  people  who  inhabited  Babylonia  before 
the  incursion  of  the  Semites.  In  the  opinion  of  the  high- 
est authorities  on  the  subject  of  ancient  Babylonian  art, 
there  is  nothing  decisive  in  the  form  or  expression  of  the 
features  of  these  antique  statuettes  as  to  the  race  to  which 
they  belong,  or  to  show  that  they  were  not  Semitic  like 
the  other  artistic  remains  of  the  country.  The  evidence 
adduced  for  the  theory  generally,  such  as  it  is,  becomes 
also  greatly  weakened  by  the  fact  that  the  Semitic  Baby- 
lonians never  in  any  way  speak  of  or  indirectly  allude  to 
such  a  people  as  that  whose  existence  is  so  strenuously 
contended  for.  Yet  the  assumed  language,  and  the  system 
of  writing  whose  features  furnish  the  only  weighty  argu- 
ments in  support  of  the  hypothesis,  continued  to  be  used 


92  A  POSSIBLE   SOLUTION  BOOK  II 

to  the  very  latest  ages  of  the  Semitic  occupation  of  Baby- 
lonia; and  it  is  practically  inconceivable  that  if  the 
Semites  acquired  their  culture  from  such  an  antecedent 
people  and  used  their  language  for  the  ordinary  purposes 
of  life  along  with  their  own,  no  tradition,  not  even  the 
name,  of  the  great  and  influential  race  to  whom  they 
owed  such  a  debt,  and  with  whom  they  must  have  been 
long  and  closely  associated,  should  have  been  preserved 
and  recorded. 

§  83.  The  following  considerations  put  briefly  and 
broadly  may  help  towards  an  elucidation  of  the  problem. 
In  the  first  place,  since  the  system  of  writing  was  origi- 
nally entirely  ideographic  and  only  gradually  became 
phonetic,  and  that  not  consistently  or  universally,  it  is 
obvious  that  the  documents  written  ideographically  may 
as  well  be  Semitic  as  foreign,  or  rather  are  much  more 
likely  to  be  of  the  former  than  of  the  latter  kind.  It 
would  have  been,  of  course,  assumed  on  all  hands  that 
such  compositions  are  Semitic,  if  it  had  not  been  for  the 
discovery  of  the  supposed  foreign  tongue;  whereas  now 
it  is  the  fashion  to  maintain  that  the  earliest  records  of 
Southern  Babylonia,  written,  as  they  are,  ideographically, 
are  "Sumerian."  The  origin  of  the  phenomenal  language 
thus  assumed  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  peculiar  history 
of  the  changes  from  the  ideographic  to  the  phonetic  mode 
of  writing.  The  gradual  transition  from  the  old  ambigu- 
ous system  to  the  IICAV  method,  with  its  constant  striving 
after  completeness,  led  to  the  invention  of  a  set  of  ex- 
planatory terms,  mainly  drawn  from  rare  and  unfamiliar 
and  obsolete  words  expressed  by  the  ideograms.1  This 
system  was  gradually  expanded  by  an  industrious  and 
influential  school  of  pedagogues  and  grammarians  into 
an  artificial  language  of  considerable  range  of  expression 
within  the  limits  of  its  application.  It  came  greatly  into 
vogue  in  connection  with  compositions  of  a  religious  or 
mystical  character,  and  was  used  occasionally  for  more 

1  The  ideograms  have,  as  a  rule,  more  than  one  meaning. 


CH.  I,  §  84  EXTRAVAGANT   SPECULATIONS  93 

general  purposes.  Again,  as  the  explanation  of  the  ideo- 
grams came  to  be  a  subject  both  of  useful  and  curious 
study,  their  meanings  were  written  down  in  vocabularies 
and  glossaries  both  in  the  terms  of  the  popular  speech, 
and  also  in  those  of  this  more  esoteric  or,  as  it  is  some- 
times called,  "hieratic  language."  In  this  way  we  have 
to  account  for  the  "bilingual"  word-lists. 

§  84.  The  Sumerian  theory  has  played  a  great  role  in 
linguistic  and  ethnological  research  during  the  last  twenty 
years.  The  general  aspect  of  the  supposed  language  led 
at  once  to  its  being  classed  with  the  agglutinative  families 
of  speech,  and  the  inevitable  "  Turanian "  conveniently 
opened  its  hospitable  doors  to  receive  a  long-lost  wanderer 
back  into  its  ancient  home.  Elaborate  attempts  have 
been  made  to  prove  close  relationship  with  the  Fin- 
notartaric  group,  especially  with  Turkish.  Inasmuch, 
however,  as  all  sound  principles  of  linguistic  science  are 
disregarded  in  such  endeavours,  this  special  discovery  has 
found  little  favour  among  the  more  sober  supporters  of 
the  general  theory.  Far  more  serious  is  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  ancient  history  and  civilization  made  upon  a 
Sumeriological  basis.  As  it  was  supposed  that  the  whole 
system  of  ideographic  writing,  with  the  distinct  ideas  it 
sets  forth,  as  well  as  the  various  names  for  gods,  religious 
institutions,  ceremonies,  laws,  natural  objects,  products 
of  art  and  manufacture,  recorded  in  the  supposed  lan- 
guage, were  of  Sumerian  origin,  it  was  necessary  to  trace 
the  rise  and  development  of  these  pre-Semitic  notions  and 
the  history  of  their  adoption  by  the  Semites.  This  has 
been  done,  in  part  at  least,  with  great  ingenuity  and 
thoroughness,  especially  by  three  scholars,  Lenormant, 
Sayce,  and  Hommel.  The  results  reached  are  for  their 
immediate  purpose  rendered  unquotable  by  the  doubt  cast 
upon  the  soundness  of  the  basal  hypothesis;  but  the  in- 
vestigations have  contributed  incidentally  to  the  enlarge- 
ment of  our  knowledge  of  early  Babylonian  civilization, 
and  may  therefore  be  used  with  discrimination  and  caution. 


94  GENERAL   CONCLUSIONS  BOOK  II 

§  85.  While  we  are  thus  obliged,  until  further  light 
shall  have  been  cast  upon  the  subject,  to  assume  that  the 
earliest  type  of  Babylonian  culture  was  mainly  of  Semitic 
origin,  it  would  be  rash  to  assert  that  people  of  that  race 
were  the  sole  occupants  of  the  lower  River  country  in 
prehistoric  times,  or  that  they  received  no  important  con- 
tributions to  their  development  from  any  outside  races. 
There  is  nothing  impossible  in  the  assumption  that  the 
whole  country  drained  by  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  south 
of  the  mountains  may  have  been  occupied  by  other  tribes 
of  men  contemporaneously  with  the  earliest  Semitic  set- 
tlers, and  that  they  were  gradually  extruded  by  the  latter. 
Such  a  hypothetical  race  may  have  been  akin  to  the  Elam- 
ites  across  the  Tigris  or  the  predecessors  of  the  Aramaeans 
in  Mesopotamia  proper.  If  such  a  people  ever  existed, 
they  left  no  deep  traces  of  their  influence  on  the  language 
of  their  victorious  rivals  —  certainly  not,  at  least,  in 
Northern  Babylonia,  the  seat  of  the  earliest  aggressive 
civilization  (§  88  ft'.).  Yet  it  is  remarkable  that  while 
there  are  few  of  the  current  words  of  the  Assyrian  or 
Semitic  Babylonian  language  which  cannot  be  explained 
from  native  or  cognate  root-forms,  many  of  the  proper 
names,  notably  those  of  early  kings  and  of  gods,  have  a 
decidedly  un-Semitic  aspect.  While,  therefore,  there 
seems  little  reason  to  believe  that  the  civilization  of  the 
Semites  of  Babylonia  as  a  whole  was  greatly  affected  by 
contact  or  intermingling  with  foreigners,  it  is  not  unrea- 
sonable to  assume  that  some  elements  of  their  religion 
may  have  come  from  an  outside  source.  The  names  of 
such  deities,  for  example,  as  Maruduk,  Nergal,  and  Ea 
are  not  very  directly  explainable  as  Semitic  words.  Many 
names  of  persons,  being  usually  combinations  of  divine 
appellations,  are  equally  difficult  to  derive  from  Semitic 
sources.  At  the  same  time  it  should  be  remembered  that 
many  of  such  difficulties  are  due  to  the  fact  that  we  are 
not  sure  in  numerous  cases  that  we  have  the  right  pronun- 
ciation of  the  ideograms,  for  it  is  in  this  style  of  writing 


CH.  I,  §  85  RESIDUUM  OF   THE   HYPOTHESIS  95 

that  proper  names  are  usually  expressed.1  The  same  cau- 
tion applies  in  some  degree  to  the  names  of  places,  which 
appear  often  to  be  non-Semitic.  Yet  it  must  be  confessed 
that  the  frequency  of  the  names,  which  we  know  to  be 
non-Semitic  from  the  ascertained  phonetic  readings,  seems 
to  strengthen  materially  the  plea  that  a  people  advanced 
beyond  the  nomadic  stage  preceded  the  Semites  in  the 
occupation  of  the  country.  This,  however,  is  a  precari- 
ous sort  of  evidence  to  put  against  the  outstanding  fact, 
on  the  other  side,  of  the  purity  of  the  Babylonian  lan- 
guage. Its  speakers  would  certainly  have  borrowed  from 
their  teachers  the  words  for  the  principal  elements  and 
appliances  of  their  historical  culture  if  they  had  been  up- 
lifted out  of  barbarism  by  the  educative  influences  of  a  for- 
eign people.  Nor  must  it  be  overlooked  that  if  we  accept 
the  Sumerian  theory,  according  to  which  the  religion  of 
that  people  exercised  an  almost  controlling  influence  upon 
the  mind  of  the  Semitic  Babylonians,  we  must  of  neces- 
sity also  believe  that  the  former  became  the  ruling  power 
in  the  states  that  resulted  from  the  conflicts  and  treaties 
of  the  rival  races.  This  conclusion  being  manifestly  out 
of  the  question,  it  only  remains  for  us  to  assume  it  to  be 
possible  that  an  antecedent  or  contemporaneous  people 
bore  a  small  share  with  the  Semites  in  the  early  develop- 
ment of  the  country,  and  that,  as  a  result  of  their  contact 
with  the  stronger  race,  they  bequeathed  to  it  some  of  the 
elements  of  the  surviving  religion,  mythology,  and  popu- 
lar superstition. 

1  Cf.  the  frank  remarks  of  Jensen  in  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  5. 


CHAPTER  II 

BABYLONIA    UNDER   SEPARATE   GOVERNMENTS 

§  86.  THE  early  civilization  of  Babylonia  had  for  its 
home  the  whole  of  that  long  elliptical  peninsula  included 
between  the  Rivers  from  their  nearest  approach  at  Bagh- 
dad south  to  the  Persian  Gulf.  There  were  in  the  earli- 
est recorded  ages  two  main  centres  of  dominion  and  cul- 
ture, established  at  the  point  where  the  great  streams 
converge  at  the  north,  and  again  at  the  corresponding 
point  where  after  their  separation  they  again  approach  at 
the  south.  These  centres  formed  respectively  the  ruling 
kingdoms  of  what  we  may  call  in  the  vaguest  fashion  North 
and  South  Babylonia;  but  we  have  to  conceive  of  each  of 
them  as  being  gradually  built  up  in  the  immemorial  Semitic 
fashion  (§§  35,  39)  out  of  smaller  city-states.  Both  the 
separate  cities  and  the  two  aggregations  just  named  had  a 
long  and  chequered  history  before  they  became  finally 
merged,  about  2250  B.C.,  into  one  empire,  with  the  city  of 
Babylon  at  the  head.  Through  various  circumstances, 
especially  from  the  fact  that  in  South  Babylonia  more 
abundant  ruins  of  ancient  cities  have  been  found  than  in 
the  North,  it  has  generally  been  supposed  that  the  former 
region  was  the  seat  of  the  earliest  civilization.  The  gen- 
eral facts  about  to  be  set  forth  will  make  this  appear  more 
than  doubtful,  and  in  any  case  to  the  northern  section 
must  be  granted  precedence  in  the  consolidation  of  politi- 
cal power  as  well  as  in  the  perfecting  of  the  chief  elements 
of  popular  culture.  Fortunately,  we  have  at  length  some 
reliable  data  for  determining  the  age  of  the  oldest  literary 


CH.  II,  §  88    THE  OLDEST  KNOWN  MONARCHY          97 

and  artistic  monument  of  Northern  Babylonia.  As  we 
listen  intently  for  some  message  from  these  far-distant 
ages, we  may  hear  what  we  may  fairly  call  "the  first  sylla- 
ble of  recorded  time"  from  the  ruined  city  of  Sippar  on  the 
Euphrates,  the  city  of  the  Sun. 

§  87.  Mr.  Hormuzd  Rassam,  the  veteran  explorer  of  the 
antiquities  of  his  native  country,  who  had  already  borne 
an  indispensable  part  in  Sir  Austen  Layard's  explorations 
in  Assyria,  was  examining  in  1881  the  mound  of  Abu 
Habba  on  the  Euphrates,  thirty  miles  southwest  of  Bagh- 
dad, when  he  found,  along  with  other  valuable  remains, 
two  terra-cotta  cylinders  of  the  last  native  king  of  Baby- 
lon, Nabonidus,  who  reigned  555-538  B.C.  In  these 
Nabonidus  relates  his  experience  and  success  as  an  anti- 
quarian and  as  a  devotee  of  the  national  gods,  in  restoring 
their  temples  and  in  tracing  their  history  from  the  earliest 
days.  Knowing  that  the  Temple  of  the  Sun  in  Sippar 
had  been  originally  founded  by  Naram-Sin,  "king  of 
Akkad,"  he  sought  long  and  diligently  for  the  foundation- 
stone  which  none  of  his  predecessors,  not  even  Nebu- 
chadrezzar the  Great,  had  succeeded  in  discovering.  It 
was  found  at  last,  eighteen  cubits  below  the  level  of  the 
ground,  bearing  the  inscription  of  the  founder,  to  whose 
genuineness  Nabonidus  himself  testifies.  He  affirms,  on 
one  of  his  cylinders,  that  this  stone  and  inscription  had 
not  been  seen  for  thirty-two  hundred  years.1  Reckoning 
back  from  550  B.C.,  the  presumable  year  of  the  discovery, 
we  get  3750  B.C.  as  the  approximate  date  of  the  building 
of  the  temple  by  Naram-Sin. 

§  88.  There  is  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  reckoning 
made  by  the  experts  of  Naboniclus  was  correct.  Almost 
all  chronological  statements  made  in  the  inscriptions  have 
been  accepted  by  modern  students  as  accurate,  because 
they  have  usually  been  proved  correct  whenever  a  means 
of  testing  them  has  been  available.  Here  it  was  evi- 
dently the  intention  to  give  the  numbers  approximately, 

i  V  R.  64  col.  II,  56  ff. 


98  THE   RECORDED   DATE   OF    SARGON   I         BOOK  II 

that  is,  as  near  as  they  could  be  reckoned  with  the  data  at 
hand.  A  mistake  of  half  a  century  is  the  outside  proba- 
ble limit  of  error;  at  least  the  Babylonian  chronologers 
meant  it  to  be  so  understood.  That  they  had  a  docu- 
mentary basis  for  their  calculation  is  hardly  to  be  doubted. 
As  we  shall  see,  the  religious  traditions  of  Sippar  were 
transferred  to  Babylon,  and  with  them  the  history  of  the 
national  cults.  Now  it  lay  in  the  very  nature  of  temple- 
worship  among  a  nation  of  astrologers  like  the  Babyloni- 
ans, that  there  should  be  a  yearly  notation  of  festivals  and 
other  great  religious  events,  as  well  as  of  the  duration  of 
the  reigns  of  the  priestly  kings.  It  is  probable  enough 
that  in  the  numerous  principalities  of  Southern  Babylonia 
also,  each  with  its  centre  of  worship,  such  records  were 
duly  maintained  from  the  earliest  times  of  temple-service ; 
but  the  frequent  changes  in  dynasties  and  seats  of  gov- 
ernment, and  the  precarious  fortunes  of  the  leading  cities, 
are  perhaps  to  be  held  responsible  for  the  absence  there  of 
continuous  fasti.1  Yet  in  Erech,  in  645  B.C.,  there  was 
kept  the  record  of  the  loss  of  one  of  the  city  deities  to  the 
Elamites  1635  years  before  (V  R.  6,  107  ff.).  With  re- 
gard to  the  possibility  of  a  scribal  error  in  the  notice 
about  Naram-Sin,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  his  own  and  con- 
temporary documents  employ  characters  so  archaic  that  a 
mistake  in  the  thousands  is  out  of  the  question,2  while  any 
error  in  the  hundreds  would  be  likely  to  affect  the  figures 
in  the  maximal  rather  than  the  minimal  direction;  that  is, 
to  increase  the  antiquity  of  the  period  in  question. 

§  89.  Naram-Sin,  the  devout  founder  of  the  Temple  of 
the  Sun  in  Sippar,  thus  immortalized  by  the  latest  king 
of  Babylon,  is  called  by  Nabonidus  "the  son  of  Sargoii." 
This  Sargon  is  thus  brought  before  our  notice  as  among 
the  oldest  of  known  monarchs.  We  have  other  secondary 
sources  of  information  respecting  him,  besides  contempo- 
raiy  documents  soon  to  be  mentioned.  The  later  notices 
form  a  combination  of  legend  and  historical  fact  of  so 

i  Cf.  Winckler,  GBA.  p.  51.  2  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  309,  note. 


CH.  II,  §  90  AUTOBIOGRAPHY   OF   SARGON  99 

curious  a  character  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  match  it 
in  all  literature.  An  analysis  of  the  material  enables  us, 
however,  to  ascertain  i'airly  well  what  is  authentic  and 
what  the  work  of  the  imagination.  We  have  preserved 
to  us  a  fragment  of  a  lengthy  narrative  of  his  personal 
history,  given  under  his  own  name.1  This  is  specially 
interesting  as  reminding  us  in  some  of  its  features  of  the 
early  life  of  Moses.  Its  unique  character  justifies  the 
transference  to  our  pages  of  the  greater  portion  of  it, 
which  runs  as  follows :  "  I  am  Sargon  the  mighty  king, 
the  king  of  Akkad.  My  mother  was  of  noble  birth ;  my 
father  I  know  not  of,  but  my  father's  brother  used  to  dwell 
in  the  highlands,  and  my  native  city  was  Azupiranu, 
which  lies  on  the  bank  of  the  Euphrates.  My  mother  of 
noble  race  conceived  me  and  bore  me  in  secret.  She  put 
me  in  a  basket  of  sur,  and  closed  up  the  opening  with 
bitumen.  She  cast  me  into  the  River,  which  did  not  flow 
over  me  [?].  The  River  carried  me  along  to  Akkl,  the 
irrigator.  Akkl,  the  irrigator,  took  me  up.  Akki,  the 
irrigator,  reared  me  up  to  boyhood.  Akkl,  the  irrigator, 
made  me  a  gardener.  While  I  acted  as  gardener,  Ishtar 
showed  me  favour.  Forty-five  years  I  ruled  over  the 
dark-haired  race  (i.e.  the  Semites)."  In  the  following 
mutilated  lines  of  the  inscription  he  goes  on  to  relate  the 
achievements  of  his  reign,  among  which  he  mentions  the 
conquest  of  Dur-il  on  the  borders  of  Elam,  and  Dilmun 
the  island-city  in  the  Persian  Gulf. 

§  90.  This  account,  in  the  shape  in  which  it  has  come 
to  us,  is  not  of  contemporary  production.  It  was  very 
probably  a  copy  made  by  Assyrian  scribes  of  an  ancient 
document  found  in  the  city  of  Akkad.  As  to  its  credi- 
bility, it  may  be  said,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  mythical 
character  of  the  statements  relating  to  the  infancy  of  the 
hero  do  not  put  the  whole  narrative  outside  the  limits  of 


1  III  R.  4Nr.  7;  KB.  Ill,  1.  pp.  100-103;  cf.  Par.  208  f.,  Hommel, 
GBA.  p.  302  f.    ' 


100  TRADITIONAL   FACTS   AND   LEGENDS          BOOK  II 

historical  reality  any  more  than  the  similar  experiences 
recorded  of  Cyrus  and  other  notable  founders  of  empires. 
Indeed,  the  fact  that  the  memory  of  Sargon  was  preserved 
in  literature  for  long  ages,  and  his  deeds  and  name  and 
fame  emulated  by  another  Sargon  three  thousand  years 
later,  is  evidence  of  a  well-founded  tradition.  As  already 
indicated,  the  autobiography  of  this  primeval  hero  was  a 
fairly  lengthy  one,  and  the  particularity  with  which  the 
deeds  of  his  manhood  are  recorded  is  evidence  of  their 
authenticity;  while  the  story  of  his  early  days  may  be 
accounted  for  on  the  very  natural  supposition  that  (like 
the  later  Sargon)  he  was  a  parvenu,  and  that  he  gives 
himself  an  introduction  to  the  world  under  the  august 
auspices  of  divine  direction  and  patronage  so  as  to  re- 
deem his  origin  from  the  reproach  of  obscurity  (cf.  §  92). 
With  regard  to  the  history  of  his  reign  and  that  of  his 
son,  Naram-Sin,  notices  of  some  fulness  have  been  pre- 
served in  a  remarkable  tablet  of  omens  and  presages.1 
This  document  gives  notes  of  enterprises  undertaken  by 
the  two  monarchs  according  to  favourable  omens  afforded 
by  observation  of  the  phases  of  the  moon  and  her  aspect 
in  the  several  months  of  the  year.  It  bears  the  signature 
of  Asshurbanipal  (668-626  B.C.),  that  is,  it  formed  part 
of  his  library,  which  contained  a  great  multitude  of  in- 
scriptions relating  to  early  times  that  his  scribes  had 
copied  out.  The  narrative  portions  are  written  in  the 
style  of  modern  Assyrian,  and  abound  in  locutions  char- 
acteristic of  the  annals  of  the  later  king  himself.  But 
the  fulness  of  minute  details  and  the  mention  of  locali- 
ties not  known  to  later  times  seem  to  preclude  the  sup- 
position that  the  whole  work  was  a  modern  invention. 
Moreover,  the  very  nature  of  the  document,  in  which  the 
motive  is  divided  between  the  achievements  of  the  two 
monarchs  and  the  occasions  or  circumstances  of  their 
enterprises,  is  little  favourable  to  the  hypothesis  of  a 
wholesale  fiction.  On  the  other  hand,  the  fact  that  the 

i  IV  R.  34. 


CH.  II,  §  91  CONTEMPORARY   INSCRIPTIONS  101 

kings  do  not  speak  in  the  first  person,  as  is  customary  in 
the  royal  annals,  gives  colour  to  the  assumption,  probable 
on  all  grounds,  that  the  whole  narrative  was  worked  up 
for  modern  readers  from  contemporary  notes  preserved  in 
the  temple  archives  of  the  old  dynasty  of  North  Baby- 
lonia. Some  of  the  matters  reported  are  of  the  most 
unexpected  character.  Mention  is  made  not  only  of  con- 
quests in  Babylonia  and  Elam,  but  also  of  expeditions 
to  Syria  and  Palestine,  and  over  the  sea  to  Cyprus. 
Sargon  spent  three  years  in  reducing  the  West-land  to  sub- 
mission and  bringing  it  under  one  administration.  With 
other  achievements  the  ascent  of  Lebanon  is  recorded,  made 
doubtless  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  the  valuable  timber 
which  from  time  immemorial  grew  upon  that  mountain 
range,  and  was  so  greatly  coveted  for  building  purposes  by 
the  monarchs  of  the  East,  far  and  near.  He  had  already 
acquired,  as  we  shall  see,  Southern  Babylonia  and  the 
country  along  the  west  of  the  Persian  Gulf;  and  as  these 
conquests  completed  the  circle  of  practicable  enterprise, 
at  least  within  the  Semitic  realm,  he  now  claimed  the  title 
of  "king  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  world."  l 

§  91.  But  for  information  concerning  the  ancient  rulers 
of  this  cradle-land  of  humanity  we  are  not  confined  to  the 
second-hand  testimony  of  later  ages.  Actual  inscriptions 
have  been  recovered  of  the  great  Sargon  himself,  of  his 
son  Naram-Sin,  and  of  other  kings  of  Babylonia  of  the 
same  period.  They  are  very  brief,  and  in  themselves  of 
little  direct  importance,  but  taken  together  with  the  other 
sources  of  information  they  enable  us  to  get  at  least  a 
partial  glimpse  of  Babylonian  affairs  in  that  remote  epoch. 
Until  very  recently  but  a  half  dozen  or  so  of  these  precious 
documents  were  known.2  But  the  number  has  been  mate- 
rially increased,  to  the  great  gain  of  historical  science,  by 
the  publication  of  the  first  instalment  of  Hilprecht's 

i  Cf.  Hilprecht,  OBT.  I,  p.  24  f. 

-  Published  in  various  works  since  1  R.  1861,  and  now  collected  by 
Winckler  in  his  Altbabylonische  Keilschrifttexte,  p.  22. 


102  ACHIEVEMENTS   OF  NARAM-SIN  BOOK  II 

monumental  work 1  embodying  the  results  of  the  Babylon- 
ian expedition  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  sent  out 
in  the  summer  of  1888.  Among  the  finds  of  this  enter- 
prise were  "six  inscriptions  of  Sargon  I,  two  of  Naram- 
Sin,  and  sixty-one  inscribed  vases  (or  fragments)  of 
Alusharshid,"  a  monarch  of  the  same  dynasty,  or  at  least 
of  the  same  period.  Looking  at  the  collection  as  a  whole, 
and  endeavouring  to  get  some  central  standpoint  whence 
we  may  survey  as  clearly  as  may  be  the  civilized  realms  of 
these  far-off  times,  we  first  take  up  a  famous  inscription 
of  Naram-Sin,  written  upon  an  alabaster  vase  which  was 
found  by  the  French  expedition  of  1852-55  and  lost  in 
the  Tigris  with  other  precious  antiquities  in  April,  1855. 
A  correct  impression  had  been  taken  of  the  legend,  which 
reads :  "  Naram-Sin,  king  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  world, 
a  vase,  the  spoil2  of  Magan."  This  brief  inscription  is 
significant  in  many  ways.  It  illustrates  the  advances  of 
artistic  work  in  these  remote  ages.  It  shows  how  wide 
the  relations  were  which  were  sustained  by  the  ambitious 
princes  of  the  Babylonian  Semites  with  the  rest  of  the 
world.  Magan  is  now  generally  believed  to  be  Eastern 
Arabia.  And  here  we  are  reminded  that  the  omen -tablets 
(§  90)  report  an  expedition  of  Naram-Sin  to  Magan,  in 
which  he  conquered  the  country  and  made  its  king  his 
captive.3  But  something  more  than  mere  military  activity 

1  The  Babylonian  Expedition  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  Series 
A.    Cuneiform  Texts,  vol.  I,  Part  I.     Plates  1-50.     The  Introduction,  pp. 
1-54,  is  chiefly  devoted  to  setting  forth  the  general  meaning  and  historical 
significance  of  the  most  important  of  the  inscriptions.     A  bibliography  of 
the  Expedition  whose  operations  were  conducted  chiefly  at  Nippur  (Nuffar) 
is  given  on  p.  45.    The  care  taken  in  reproducing  accurately  the  forms  of 
the  characters  makes  this  volume  the  most  important  contribution  that  has 
been  made  to  ancient  Babylonian  palaeography  since  the  publication  of  1  R. 

2  For  the  various  translations  proposed  for  the  word  namrarj(k}  here 
rendered  "spoil,"  see  Amiand  in  ZK.  I,  249,  Jensen  in  KB.  Ill,  1,  39, 
and  Hilprecht,  OBT.  1,  20,  note.    The  meaning  of  "  spoil "  might  seem  to 
be  suggested  by  the  expedition  to  Magan,  but  this  inference,  though  plausi- 
ble, is  not  quite  certain. 

3  IV  R.  34,  15-18  b. 


CH.  II,  §  92  RANGE   OF   HIS   DOMINION  103 

is  also  indicated  by  these  tokens.  It  is  probable  that,  just 
as  West  Arabia  was  coveted  and  occupied  by  the  Egyp- 
tians in  very  early  times  (§  134),  for  the  sake  of  its 
mineral  productions,  so  in  the  east  of  the  peninsula,  similar 
enterprises  were  conducted  by  their  rivals  in  the  work 
of  civilization.  Even  more  striking,  if  possible,  is  a 
memorial  of  Naram-Sin  found  in  the  island  of  Cyprus,  a 
cylinder-seal1  thus  inscribed:  " Mar-Ishtar,  son  of  Ilu- 
balit,  servant  of  (the  god)  Naram-Sin."  If  this  is  the 
same  famous  ruler,  the  possessor  would  perhaps  be  a 
general  or  viceroy  of  the  Babylonian  potentate,  who  would 
accordingly  seem  to  have  continued  in  the  West-land  the 
domination  maintained  by  his  father  Sargon.  Finally,  it 
is  to  be  said  that  two  brief  inscriptions  of  Naram-Sin  were 
found  by  the  Pennsylvania  expedition  at  Nippur,2  describ- 
ing him  as  a  temple-builder  to  Bel,  the  tutelary  deity  of 
that  city  (§  94).  Another  has  also  been  unearthed  at 
Tel loh  (§  95).  From  these  it  is  certain  that  his  dominion 
embraced  Central  and  Southern  Babylonia,  down  to  the 
shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf,  —  a  fact  which  is  already 
implied  in  his  subjugation  of  Magan,  still  further  south. 

§  92.  We  are  now  prepared  to  inquire  further  into  the 
character  of  this  first  great  empire  of  the  Semitic  race  and 
of  the  world.  It  was  apparently  founded,  or  at  least 
enlarged  to  its  imperial  magnitude,  by  the  great  Sargon 
himself.  According  to  the  autobiography  (§  89)  his  father 
was  of  obscure  origin,  so  that  he  does  not  care  to  name  him 
in  his  memoirs.  But  he  was  not  always  so  unfilial,  as  we 
learn  from  one  of  Hilprecht's  inscriptions,3  where  he  calls 
himself  the  son  of  Itti-Bel  ("With  Bel"),  a  good  old 
Semitic  name,  which  meets  us  three  thousand  years  later  in 
the  Book  of  Kings  (1  K.  xvi.  31),  the  Ithobal  of  Josephus. 

1  TSBA.  V,  422,  441  f.  cf.  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  309.     On  palseographic 
grounds,  Hilprecht  (OBT.  I,  p.  22,  n.  6)  thinks  the  cylinder  cannot  be 
earlier  than  2000-1500  B.C.    The  (deified)  Naram-Sin  of  the  inscription 
is  still  a  puzzle. 

2  OBT.  I,  p.  18  f.  8  OBT.  I,  PI.  2  ;  cf.  ibid.  p.  15  f. 


104  SAKGON   AND   HIS  EMPIRE  BOOK  II 

His  own  name  is  not  so  clear  in  meaning.  I  have  assumed 
(§  89)  that  he  is  the  same  ruler  who  is  called  "Sargon" 
(Sar-kenu J)  by  Nabonidus,  and  there  never  could  be  any 
reasonable  doubt  of  this  identity,  though  the  name  of  our 
hero  is  written  in  these  old  documents  Sargdni-lar-dli 
("  Sargon  king  of  the  city  ").2  With  this  appellation  must 
be  compared  the  name  of  another  king,  nearly  contem- 
porary, who  is  called  in  a  brief  inscription,3  the  only  one 
we  possess,  Bi-in-ga-ni-sar-dli.  It  is  to  be  remarked  that 
the  identity  with  the  Sargon  of  Nabonidus  is  further 
supported  by  another  inscription4  of  /Sargani-sar-dli,  in 
which  he  speaks  of  presenting  the  perforated,  oval-shaped 
ornament  of  polished  marble  upon  which  he  writes  to  the 
sun-god  in  Sippar,  in  whose  temple  it  was  that  Nabonidus 
found  the  writing  of  "Naram-Sin  son  of  Sargon"  (§  87). 
To  return  now  to  the  more  important  question  of  the  range 
of  dominion  of  this  dynasty,  it  is  significant  that  it  is 
claimed  for  Sargon  in  the  astrological  tablets 5  that  he 
invaded  Elam  and  subdued  its  people.  This  implies 
virtually  a  sovereignty  in  Western  Asia  from  west  to  east, 
almost  conterminous  with  that  possessed  by  the  most 
powerful  kings  of  Assyria  and  Babylonia  three  millen- 
niums later.  In  striking  confirmation  of  this  claim  is  the 
fact  that  another  monarch  of  the  time,  already  referred  to, 
Alusarsid  6  reports  in  inscriptions  found  in  Nippur  that  he 
also  subdued  the  land  of  Elam.  But  this  is  not  all  the 

1  See  Note  15  in  Appendix. 

2  The  first  part  of  the  personal  name  is  written  phonetically  sar  (§  80), 
while  the  Sar  of  the  second  portion  is  merely  the  pronunciation  of  the 
ideogram  for  "king."     Oppert,  who  thinks  it  an  "inadmissible  plaisan- 
terie  "  to  identify  him  and  Sargon,  maintains  that  the  whole  appellation 
means  "  strong  is  the  king  of  the  city  "  (ZA.  Ill,  124).    Against  this  view 
see,  especially,  Hilprecht,  OBT.  I,  p.  16  f.  "Sargon,"  that  is  Saryan  is 
apparently  a  contraction  of  this  fuller  designation. 

3  See  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  299  f. 

4  Collection  Le  Clercq.  Catalogue  raisonnee,  No.  46  (Paris,  1885  ff.). 

5  IV  R,  34,  1-3  a. 

6  See  OBT.  I,  p.  20  f .  and  PI.  4.  5.     Hilprecht  here  goes  on  to  prove,  by 
this  and  other  contemporary  evidence,  the  general  reliability  of  the  omen- 


Cn.  II,  §  93  SIGNIFICANCE   OF  THIS   EPOCH  105 

evidence  of  the  latest-found  ancient  documents  illustrative 
of  the  wide  extent  of  the  domains  of  Sargon  and  his  suc- 
cessors. Northeastward,  beyond  the  Tigris,  as  far  as  the 
mountains  of  Media,  was  spread  a  Semitic  population 
using  the  language  of  Babylonia.  This  important  fact  we 
learn  from  the  correct  reading  and  interpretation  by  Hil- 
precht1  of  an  inscription2  of  a  king  of  the  Gute,  the 
inhabitants  of  the  region  in  question.  The  inscribed  object 
was  found  in  Sippar,  and  was  apparently  carried  off  by  one 
of  the  dynasty  of  Sargon,  from  which  we  infer  that  for  a 
time,  at  least,  the  land  of  the  Gute  was  subject  to  the  kings 
of  Akkad3(cf.  §  171). 

§  93.  There  is  no  space  for  further  discussion  and 
speculation  on  these  fascinating  themes  of  primitive  his- 
tory and  civilization.  The  comparative  fulness  with  which 
the  subject  has  been  treated  will  be  justified  by  this  single 
consideration,  that  in  the  political  conditions  of  the  empire 
of  Sargon  and  his  dynasty  we  have  essentially  the  ruling 
motive  and  the  chief  significance  of  the  history  of  Western 
Asia  for  the  three  thousand  years  that  followed  down  to 
the  fall  of  Babylonia,  the  overthrow  of  Semitism,  and  the 
era  of  Cyrus  and  the  Persians.  The  long  series  of  events, 
including  the  world-moving  fortunes  of  Israel,  with  the 
rise  and  decline  and  disappearance  of  people  after  people 
and  empire  after  empire,  is  bridged  over  and  unified  by  one 
issue.  The  main  interest  of  this  chequered  history  is  the 
struggle  between  the  east  and  west,  or  rather  the  fixed, 
unfaltering  endeavour  of  the  rulers  of  the  East  to  subdue 
and  dominate  the  West-land.  Whether  the  controlling 
dynasty  of  the  River  country  was  North  Babylonian  or 
South  Babylonian  or  Elamitic  or  Assyrian  or  Chaldtean, 

tablets,  in  what  they  say  of  Sargon  and  Naram-Siu.  He  holds  (p.  19) 
that  Alusharshid  preceded  Sargon. 

1  OBT.  I,  pp.  12-14. 

2  Published  by  Winckler  in  ZA.  IV,  406 ;  cf.  Jensen,  ZA.  VIII,  227  f. 
8  For  evidence  as  to  the  Semitic  character  of  the  neighbouring  people  of 

Lulubi,  see  the  reference  in  Hilprecht  I.e.  p.  13,  n.  1. 


106  MOMENTOUS   RESULTS  OF   THE   POLICY        BOOK  II 

the  purpose  and  the  effort  were  unalterably  maintained. 
Sargon  the  First,  after  we  know  not  how  many  centuries 
of  preparation  on  the  part  of  his  people  and  predecessors, 
achieved  a  dominion  stretching  "  from  sea  to  sea  and  from 
the  River  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth."  He,  the  founder  of 
the  first  great  Babylonian  dynasty,  thus  established  an 
ideal  of  achievement  for  all  his  successors,  which  never 
failed  to  fire  their  imagination  and  their  ambition.  And 
it  was  precisely  the  same  task  which  the  founder  of  the 
last  Assyrian  dynasty  undertook  when  he  assumed  the 
name  of  Sargon l  and  followed  in  the  ineffaceable  footsteps 
of  his  prototype,  the  first  world-conqueror  of  his  race.  We 
are  accustomed  to  think  and  say  that  nothing  changes  in 
the  East.  There  is  something  awe-inspiring  in  this  ever- 
lasting struggle,  in  this  stern  resolve,  whose  fulfilment 
occupied  a  succession  of  empires  for  over  thirty  centuries. 
And  when  we  try  to  estimate  the  worth  of  ancient  Semi- 
tism  and,  with  the  sense  that  the  roll  of  its  achievements 
is  crowned  by  the  mission  and  work  of  Israel,  endeavour 
to  trace  the  connection  between  the  fortunes  of  Israel  and 
those  of  its  multiform  environment  of  peoples  and  nations, 
we  may  plainly  discern  the  very  beginning  of  the  end  in 
the  fate  of  the  West-land  at  the  hands  of  its  first  eastern 
invaders,  and  the  Babylonian  Exile  itself  in  the  victorious 
march  of  Sargon  of  Akkad  to  and  from  the  shores  of  the 
Western  Sea ! 2 

§  94.    So  much  for  the  history  of  this  epoch  of  early 
Semitic  history  as  far  as  it  can  as  yet  be  gathered  from  the 

1  The  claim  made  for  Sargon  I,  in  the  omen-tablets  (IV  R.  34,  24-26  a), 
that  he  sailed  over  the  sea  of  the  West-land, whence  he  "brought  pris- 
oners over  the  land  and  sea"  and  which  is,  perhaps,  confirmed  by  the 
discovery  in  Cyprus  above  referred  to  (§  91),  has  been  supposed  to  be  a 
fiction  based  upon  the  expedition  to  Cyprus  made  by  the  younger  Sargon 
(Hommel,  GBA.  p.  307  f.).     More  likely  is  it  that  Sargon  II  undertook 
this  enterprise  in  imitation  of  his  predecessor,  whose  achievements  he 
made  it  the  business  of  his  life  to  emulate. 

2  Compare  the  article  "  Providence  in  Oriental  History  "  in  the  Sunday 
School  Times,  March  31,  1894. 


OH.  n,  §  04  AKKAD   AND   SIPPAR  107 

meagre  relics  which  are  being  rendered  to  us  from  out  of 
the  superincumbent  dust  and  debris  of  six  millenniums. 
For  the  sake  of  greater  definiteness,  a  word  should  be  added 
as  to  the  chief  centres  of  population  and  political  influence 
in  North  Babylonia  during  this  and  the  subsequent  periods 
of  ancient  time.  First,  as  to  the  seat  of  the  kingdom  of 
S argon  and  Naram-Sin,  who  are  called  kings  of  "  Akkad." 1 
This  famous  old  city,  which  is  mentioned  as  one  of  the 
original  settlements  of  Babylonia  in  Gen.  x.  10,  must  have 
lost  its  autonomy,  or  at  least  its  importance,  at  a  very  early 
date,  since  it  is  only  referred  to  in  the  later  literature  as  a 
city  in  an  antiquarian  or  religious  connection.2  But  in 
spite  of  its  decline,  its  influence  was  commemorated  in  two 
capital  ways :  by  the  perpetuation  of  the  worship  of  the 
deities  of  the  city  of  Akkad,  and  by  the  transference  of  its 
name  to  the  region  of  which,  as  the  city  of  Sargon  and  his 
dynasty,  it  was  the  political  centre,  so  that  Akkad  down 
to  the  latest  times  was  used  as  the  designation  of  Northern 
Babylonia.3  Lying  very  close  to  Akkad  was  the  city  of 
Sippar.  The  descriptions  of  the  excavations  of  Nabonidus 
(cf.  §  87)  make  out  their  sites  to  have  been  practically 
identical  or  at  least  historically  inseparable.4  The  associ- 
ated fortunes  of  the  two  cities  is  so  instructive  from  the 
point  of  view  of  religious  as  well  as  of  political  history, 

1  Written  A-GA-DE.     The  last  sign  has  also  the  phonetic  value  ne,  and 
accordingly  the  word  is  written  by  some  scholars  "  Agane."     The  former 
pronunciation  is  almost  certainly  right.     The  most  serious  ground  for 
scruple  is  suggested  by  the  names  of  the  two  kings  of  the  city,  Sargani 
and  Bingani  (§  92),  which  might  plausibly  be  explained  respectively  as 
"  King  of  Agane  "  and  "  Son  of  Agane."     No  account  of  these  forms  yet 
given  is  satisfactory.    In  any  case  it  must  not  be  supposed  that  Akkad  is 
derived  from  Ayade.     If  the  latter  ever  was  an  actual  word,  and  not 
merely  a  mode  of  writing  Akkad,  the  reverse  was  more  probably  the  case. 
As  a  city  the  writing  is  regularly  Agade  ;  as  a  country  or  kingdom  Akkadu, 
which  may  be  assumed  to  have  been  primarily  an  adjective,  that  is,  the 
territory  of  (the  city)  Akkad. 

2  V  R.  35,  31  (Cyrus)  probably  refers  to  a  foreign  locality,  its  namesake. 
8  Par.  199  f.  ;  KGF.  533  f. 

*  Cf.  I  R.  69  col.  II,  29  with  col.  Ill,  27  f. 


108  DUAL  WORSHIP  IN  A  DOUBLE   CITY          BOOK  II 

that  it  will  repay  us  to  dwell  upon  them  for  a  moment. 
A  suggestion  of  the  changeful  fates  of  this  locality  is 
afforded  by  the  fact  that  we  have  frequent  references  to 
two  Sippars,  namely,  "  Sippar  of  the  Sun-god  "  and  "  Sip- 
par  of  Anunit,"  a  goddess  whose  cult  was  combined  with 
that  of  Ishtar.  We  learn,  in  fact,  from  Nabonidus,  that  the 
worship  of  Ishtar  of  Akkad  was  replaced  by  that  of  Anunit 
of  Sippar.1  Thus  we  have  evidence  that  in  very  early 
times  Sippar  was  the  great  seat  of  the  worship  of  the  sun, 
while  in  Akkad  Ishtar  was  similarly  honoured.  In  the 
time  of  Sargon  and  Naram-Sin,  when  the  cit}T  of  Akkad 
was  supreme,  these  monarchs  sedulously  cultivated  both 
types  of  worship ;  but  that  the  Moon-god  was  also  adored 
is  proved  by  the  very  name  Naram-Sin,  "the  beloved  of 
the  Moon-god."  This  religious  syncretism  simply  goes  to 
show  that  the  building  up  of  the  ancient  Babylonian  states 
went  on  in  their  earliest  stages  by  gradual  absorption 
through  conquest  or  treaty,  as  elsewhere  in  the  Semitic 
world  (§  58  f.).  The  allusions  to  the  two  Sippars  has 
suggested  the  identification  of  them  with  Sepharvaim 
(2  K.  xvii.  24,  31;  xviii.  34;  xix.  13),  which  was  supposed 
to  show  a  dual  ending.  But  Sepharvaim  is  probably  a  city 
of  Northern  Syria  (§  349).  An  interesting  inference  from 
the  references  to  these  cities  is  that  their  centre  of  unity 
and  development  wras  the  temple  of  the  chief  deity.  In 
the  case  of  the  double  Sippar,  it  is  most  natural  to  assume 
that  the  two  communities,  addicted  to  the  Sun-god  and 
Ishtar  respectively,  lay  very  close  together;  that  one  of 
them,  the  seat  of  Ishtar,  which  was  formerly  called  Akkad, 
was  at  the  time  of  the  old  empire  the  more  powerful  of  the 
two  and  the  centre  of  royal  authority ;  that  afterwards  the 
other  ("  Sippar  of  the  sun  ")  became  the  more  important, 
and  absorbed  Akkad.  The  temple  of  Ishtar,  however,  in 
Akkad,  still  gave  distinctiveness  to  that  quarter  of  the 
double  city,  which  W7as  called  in  the  later  literature 
"Sippar  of  Anunit,"  in  continuation  of  the  worship  of 

1  Cf .  I  R.  69  col.  II,  48  with  col.  Ill,  28. 


CH.  II,  §  94  CUTHA   AND   NIPPUR  109 

"  Ishtar  of  Akkad."  It  is  barely  possible,  but  as  yet  quite 
unproved,  that  the  city  of  Akkad  lay  opposite  to  Sippar, 
on  the  left  bank  of  the  Euphrates. —  Another  city  of  North 
Babylonia  must  have  played  an  important  part  in  these 
very  ancient  times  before  the  era  of  Babylon.  I  refer  to 
Rutu,  the  Cutha  (2  K.  xvii.  24,  30)  of  the  Bible.  This  city 
lay  about  equidistant  from  Sippar  and  Babylon  and  fifteen 
miles  from  each,  a  little  eastward  of  them  and  of  the 
Euphrates,  on  the  site  of  the  extensive  modern  ruins 
known  as  Tell  Ibrahim.  Here  was  the  chief  seat  of  the 
worship  of  the  god  Nergal,  the  lion-like  god,  according  to 
his  favourite  representation  in  sculpture.  It  was  known 
already  from  the  Bible  that  this  deity  was  the  chief  god  of 
the  Cuthseans,  and  the  confirmation  afforded  by  the  in- 
scriptions is  still  further  illustrated  in  the  discovery  by 
Rassam  of  his  temple  in  the  ruins  above  mentioned.  The 
matter  has  special  interest  for  Bible  students,  from  the 
fact  that  the  Samaritans  were  called  "  Cuthaeans "  by 
the  later  Jews  on  account  of  their  prominence  among  the 
imported  foreigners.  To  the  Jews  the  relics  of  Nergal 
worship  would  be  specially  odious  on  account  of  the  asso- 
ciations of  the  Babylonian  Exile.  The  antiquity  of  Cutha 
as  a  sacred  place  is  suggested  by  the  custom  of  Assyrian 
kings  to  offer  sacrifices  there  on  their  marches  to  Babylon.1 
The  discovery  of  historical  records  of  Cutha  would  doubt- 
less add  essentially  to  our  knowledge  of  the  early  condition 
and  fortunes  of  North  Babylonia. —  Another  city,  Nippur, 
which  belonged  more  to  North  than  to  South  Babylonia 
(cf.  §  101,  108,  and  110,  note),  and  which  still  bears  its 
ancient  name  in  the  form  Nuffar,  was  about  thirty-five 
miles  southeast  of  Babylon.  Through  it  ran  the  famous 
canal,  or  rather  canalized  river,  the  Shatt-en-Nil.  The 
fact  that  so  many  of  the  most  ancient  cities  of  Babylonia 
lay  upon  this  stream  is  proof  of  its  enormous  antiquity, 
and  goes  far,  with  other  evidence,  to  establish  the  conjec- 
ture of  Delitzsch  that  it  was  one  of  the  four  "rivers  "  of 

i  Wiuckler,  GBA.  p.  33. 


110  IMPORTANCE   OF   NIPPUR  BOOK  II 

Eden.1  The  ruins,  which  are  of  great  extent,  were  exam- 
ined hastily  by  Layarcl,  and  now  have  a  permanent  interest 
attaching  to  them  as  the  scene  of  the  explorations  and 
discoveries  of  the  Pennsylvania  expedition  of  1888  and 
1889  (§  91).  Nippur  was  the  real  centre  of  Babylonia  in 
the  most  ancient  historic  times.  In  its  ruins  have  been 
found  inscriptions  not  only  of  Sargon  I,  and  his  successors, 
but  of  the  dynasty  of  "Ur  of  the  Chaldees "  (§  101). 
This  evidence  of  subjection,  first  to  the  ruling  power  of 
North  Babylonia,  and  then  to  that  of  the  South,  sufficiently 
indicates  its  importance.  Its  possession  was,  in  fact, 
coveted  not  only  on  account  of  its  central  location,  but 
also  because  of  its  religious  renown.  It  was  the  sacred 
seat  of  Bel,  the  oldest  chief  god  of  the  Semitic,' or  at  least 
of  the  North-Semitic  peoples,  the  Canaanitic  Baal,  the 
rival  of  Jehovah.  This  fact  alone  may  plausibly  suggest 
that  Nippur  was  the  beginning  of  the  Semitic  settlements 
in  Babylonia. 

§  95.  We  have  now  to  turn  to  Southern  Babylonia. 
Here  also  the  most  that  we  know  about  the  affairs  of  the 
remotest  past  has  been  gained  through  recent  discoveries. 
The  researches  and  explorations  in  this  region,  undertaken 
by  the  French  expedition  under  Fresnel  and  Oppert  (1851- 
1855),  as  well  as  by  Loftus  and  Taylor  (1853-1855),  were 
fruitful  of  results  as  far  as  these  indicated  the  character 
of  the  civilization  of  the  ancient  dwellers  in  the  valley  of 
the  Euphrates,  since  they  brought  to  light  a  great  variety 
of  interesting  objects, —  manufactured  articles,  ornaments, 
and  other  works  of  art.  But  of  inscriptions,  which  alone 
could  unfold  the  story  of  the  past  ages,  not  many  of  an 
historical  character  were  put  by  them  at  the  disposal  of  the 
scholars  of  the  West.2  Yet  the  few  that  were  recovered 
have  been  found  to  be  of  great  value,  especially  when 
brought  into  the  right  relation  with  the  documents  since 
unearthed  and  published  by  other  explorers.  Of  these, 

1  See  Par.  70  ff. 

2  Some  of  the  treasures  of  the  French  explorers  were  lost  in  the  Tigris. 


Cn.  II,§9u       DISCOVERIES   IX   SOUTH   BABYLONIA  111 

the  most  successful  has  been  De  Sarzec,  French  Consul  at 
Baghdad  and  Basra,  whose  excavations  (1876-1881)  in  the 
mounds  of  Telloh,  four  miles  east  of  the  great  canal  Shatt- 
el-Hai,  about  thirty  miles  due  north  of  its  junction  with 
the  Euphrates,  resulted  in  the  acquisition  of  a  great 
variety  of  objects  with  and  without  inscriptions,  —  clay 
tablets,  engraved  and  unengraved  clay  cylinders,  orna- 
ments, statues  large  and  small  of  remarkable  correctness 
of  execution,  and  other  products  of  artistic  effort.  For 
detailed  descriptions  of  these  objects  with  conjectures  as 
to  their  respective  ages,  I  must  refer  to  the  special  publica- 
tion,1 and  hasten  on  to  summarize  the  historical  results  of 
these  and  the  earlier  discoveries,  as  far  as  they  have  a 
bearing  upon  our  general  theme.  The  mounds  of  Telloh 
occupy  the  site  of  a  city  anciently  called  Lagas.  This 
city  was  the  seat  of  the  earliest  dynasty  of  South  Baby- 
lonian kings  with  which  we  are  as  yet  acquainted.  It  is 
a  matter  of  very  great  difficulty  to  give  a  satisfactory 
account  of  these  rulers  and  their  domains.  One  great 
obstacle  is  the  fact,  which  must  be  taken  account  of  in  all 
that  relates  to  this  primitive  period  in  South  Babylonia, 
that  the  accessible  inscriptions  are  written  ideographically 
(or,  as  some  say,  in  the  "  Sumerian  "  language,  §  80),  and 
the  reading  of  many  of  the  words,  and  even  of  the  names 
of  most  of  the  kings  themselves,  is  quite  doubtful.  It 
should  also  be  stated  that  from  the  very  earliest  times  the 
kings  of  Babylonia,  both  northern  and  southern,  confine 
themselves  in  their  memoirs  almost  entirely  to  statements 
of  their  operations  in  temple-building,  and  have  little  to 
tell  us  about  their  policy  or  their  achievements  that  was 
not  connected  with  the  predominating  interest  of  the 
worship  of  the  gods.  It  will  signify  little  to  the  reader 
to  be  informed  that  the  reading  generally  preferred 2  for 

1  Ernest  de  Sarzec,  Dtcouvertes  en  Chaldee.    Public  par  les  soins  de 
Leon  Heuzey.    Paris,  188-4  ff. 

2  See  Winckler,  GBA.  p.  41 ;  Jensen  in  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  10  f. ;  Amiaud  in 

I,  p.  50. 


112  EARLY  SOUTH   BABYLONIAN   RULERS          BOOK  ft 

the  ruler  usually  put  at  the  head  of  the  dynasty  is  Ur-Nina 
(perhaps  better  Amel-Nina),  the  man  or  servant  of  the 
goddess  Nina,  and  that  he  was  followed  by  several  rulers 
of  problematic  nomenclature.  Of  these  it  can  only  be  said 
definitely  that  they  emulated  each  other  in  their  zeal  and 
success  in  erecting  temples  and  palaces,  and  that  the  most 
noted  of  them,  an  energetic  potentate  named  Ur-Ba'u  (or 
Amel-Ba'u),  made  it  his  business  to  see  to  it  that  no  deity 
worshipped  in  any  section  of  his  little  kingdom  should  be 
without  a  worthy  sanctuary,  and  thus  doubtless  contributed 
much  to  consolidate  the  rival  communities  of  which  his 
realm  was  composed.  From  him  we  have  an  inscription 
of  six  columns,  the  earliest  original  lengthy  document  as 
yet  found  in  Babylonia. 

§  96.  The  era  of  the  last-named  ruler,  Ur-Ba'u,  may 
be  pretty  confidently  set  down  as  not  later  than  3000  B.C., 
and  the  city  of  Lagash  may  be  held  to  have  arisen  to  power 
between  3500  and  3300  B.C.  How  much  earlier  than  that 
the  civilization  of  South  Bab}'lonia  ranges  back  we  cannot 
tell.  There  seems  to  be  no  good  reason  why  it  should  be 
considered  as  earlier  in  origin  than  that  of  North  Baby- 
lonia. In  both  cases  we  are  bound  to  assume  a  long  period 
of  slow  development  in  glyptic,  plastic,  and  pictorial  art, 
the  art  of  writing,  and  the  arts  of  life ;  and  it  js  not  too 
much  to  expect  that  one  day  the  material  will  be  before  us 
which  will  furnish  the  basis  for  a  satisfactory  judgment 
upon  these  weighty  matters.  For  the  progress  of  South 
Babylonia  onward  from  the  time  of  Ur-Ba'u  we  are  fairly 
well  supplied  with  information,  though  there  are  several 
intervals  of  only  vaguely  estimable  duration  of  which 
nothing  is  as  yet  known.  After  a  gap  of  apparently  not 
many  years  arose  a  prince  of  very  remarkable  character, 
named  by  the  Sumerianists  Gudea,  but  whom  we  may  be 
permitted  to  call  by  the  most  common  equivalent  of  the 
ideogram,  Nabu  (the  "  Declarer,  or  Prophet  ").  From  him 
proceed  the  most  and  the  most  important  of  the  remains 
found  in  Telloh :  eight  statues,  two  large  clay  cylinders, 


CH.  II,  §  97       THEIR   VAST   RANGE   OF   DOMINION  113 

and  hundreds  of  fragments  of  small  texts.  He  may  fairly 
be  regarded  as  the  greatest  of  the  rulers  of  Lagash.  He 
was  not  only  a  temple-builder  like  all  of  his  kind,  but  as 
an  explorer  and  conqueror  he  ranks  with  the  foremost  of 
West  Asiatic  monarchs.  One  is  tempted  to  say  that  he 
must  have  taken  the  great  Sargon  of  Akkad  as  his  hero 
and  model,  whose  dynasty  and  empire  must  then  have  been 
long  past  but  not  forgotten.  Like  other  Babylonian  rulers 
to  the  end  of  the  race,  he  says  little  directly  of  warlike 
exploits  or  of  his  measures  of  government.  But  just  as 
the  omen-tablets  of  Sargon  tell  of  his  achievements  in  the 
West-land  and  beyond  (§  90  f.),  so  we  have  from  Nabu 
much  indirect  information  about  his  activity  in  the  same 
and  other  remote  localities.  In  enumerating  the  materials 
used  for  building  certain  of  his  temples,  he  mentions  hav- 
ing obtained  timbers  of  cedar  up  to  seventy  cubits  in 
length  from  Mount  Amanus  in  Northwestern  Syria,  as  well 
as  trees  of  the  same  sort  from  certain  mountains  in  the 
West  of  unknown  location;  while  in  other  mountainous 
districts  in  the  same  region  he  quarried  great  stones  for  his 
temples.  The  material  for  his  statues  was  obtained  from 
Mayan,  or  Northeast  Arabia,  while  gold  and  precious  stones 
in  profusion  were  furnished  him  by  Meluha,  or  Northwest 
Arabia.  Moreover,  he  tells  us  that  his  ships  came  laden 
with  various  kinds  of  wood  from  these  same  districts  in 
Arabia,  from  the  island  of  Dilmun  in  the  Persian  Gulf, 
and  from  an  unknown  region  called  Grubi.1 

§  97.  We  have  here  a  somewhat  more  definite  picture 
of  the  international  relations  of  Babylonia  than  it  was 
possible  to  gain  from  the  scanty  notices  of  the  times  and 
the  dominion  of  Sargon  and  his  successor.  In  the  interests 
of  the  southern  monarchy  ships  sailed  not  only  the  Persian 
Gulf  but  the  Red  Sea  as  well.  The  treasures  of  the 
Arabian  coastland,  in  costly  woods  and  spices,  in  precious 

1  Thought  by  Amiaud,  RP.2  I,  p.  53,  on  plausible  grounds,  to  stand 
for  Egypt. 

i 


114  RELATIONS    WITH    WESTERN   LANDS  BOOK  II 

stones  and  stones  for  statuary,  were  spoiled  by  this  ruler 
of  an  ancient  city,  the  very  name  of  which  is  now  a 
subject  of  dispute,  and  even  the  existence  of  which  was 
not  suspected  until  a  few  years  ago.  Some  interesting 
questions  suggest  themselves  at  the  mention  of  this  traffic 
by  land  and  sea.  We  know  that  the  Egyptians,  the  close 
neighbours  of  the  western  portions  of  Syria  and  Arabia, 
were  interested  at  a  very  early  date  (§  134  f.)  in  their 
trade  and  productions,  especially  in  those  of  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula.  Does  not  this  suggest  the  possibility  of  rela- 
tions between  Babylonia  and  Egypt  of  a  business  and 
possibly  of  a  political  kind,  at  a  much  earlier  period  ?  If 
there  was,  as  seems  probable,  a  close  connection  between 
the  earliest  civilization  of  the  valleys  of  the  Nile  and  the 
Euphrates,  may  not  the  missing  link  be  found  in  westward 
expeditions  of  the  Babylonians  at  a  time  long  preceding 
that  of  Nabu,  or  even  that  of  Sargon  ?  Another  problem 
presents  itself  in  connection  with  the  matter  of  shipping. 
In  later  historical  times,  for  example  in  the  days  of  Solo- 
mon, the  navigation  of  the  Red  Sea  was  in  the  hands  of 
the  Phoenicians  (1  K.  ix.  26  ff.),  and  under  Sinacherib  the 
Assyrians  availed  themselves  of  Phoenician  ship-builders 
and  sailors  for  the  construction  of  proper  vessels  and  the 
navigation  of  the  Persian  Gulf.1  Is  it  not  likely  that 
Phoenician  vessels  and  seamen  were  employed  by  the 
Babylonians  when  the  possibility  was  presented  to  them 
of  transporting  the  products  of  Western  Arabia  more  easily 
by  the  sea  than  by  the  land  route?  That  Sargon  and 
Naram-Sin  transported  their  troops  and  traders  to  Cyprus 
in  Sidonian  vessels  may  be  taken  for  granted,  for  they  had 
no  other  resource  for  such  an  enterprise. 

§  98.  The  same  remarkable  prince  is  not  entirely  silent 
as  to  his  deeds  of  arms.  Already  at  this  early  date  we  see 
Elam  an  active  rival  of  the  Babylonian  states.  Nabu 
informs  us  that  he  broke  the  power  of  the  city  of  Aman 
(§  106).  If  this  refers  to  the  district  in  Elam  of  which 

1  I  R.  40,  26  ;  43,  23  ff. ;  III  R.  12  f. 


CH.  II,  §  98     PRIESTLY   RULERS   AND   THEIR   STATUS  115 

Cyrus  was  the  hereditary  ruler,  we  find  here  a  continuation 
of  the  rivalry  between  Elam  and  the  Babylonian  states 
which  is  indicated  in  the  omen-tablets  of  Sargon,  and 
renewed  evidence  of  the  antiquity  of  the  Elamitic  peoples.1 
Apart  from  this  we  have  indirect  testimony  of  the  military 
power  of  Nabu  and  his  people.  We  have  seen  how  the 
costly  productions  of  the  whole  of  the  West-land  were  at 
his  disposal;  and  a  very  slight  acquaintance  with  the 
political  conditions  of  the  ancient  East  is  sufficient  to 
assure  any  one  that  these  coveted  products  could  only  be 
obtained  directly  by  a  ruler  who  was  either  sovereign  or 
suzerain  of  the  country.  This  observation  suggests  an 
inquiry  as  to  the  political  status  of  Nabu.  It  has  been 
supposed  by  most  scholars  of  late  that,  while  the  earliest 
rulers  of  Lagash  were  independent  kings,  Ur-Ba'u  and 
Nabu  were  in  one  form  or  another  vassals  of  an  outside 
monarch.  This  view  is  based  upon  a  fact  which  we  have 
not  as  yet  alluded  to,  because  it  is  worthy  of  special  men- 
tion as  a  separate  topic.  The  distinction  between  the 
earlier  and  later  rulers  is  that  while  the  former  call  them- 
selves "kings,"  the  latter,  to  the  close  of  the  dynasty,  give 
themselves  ideographically  the  title  of  nisdk  (or  i8sdk~), 
a  word  which  has  been  supposed  to  mean  "lieutenant 
before  the  name  of  a  country,  and  vicaire  before  the  name 
of  a  divinity  "  (Amiaud).  There  is  also,  however,  a  con- 
sensus of  opinion  to  the  effect  that  the  word  signifies  a 
"priest-king  "  or  "priestly  ruler."  There  is  no  doubt  that 
this  is  the  proper  meaning  of  the  term,  since,  according  to 
the  Assyrian  vocabularies,2  it  is  explained  as  "sacrificer," 
a  signification  with  which  its  derivation  accords.3  From 
the  fact  that  in  these  antique  communities  the  priests  and 
their  assistants  were  not  only  the  most  important,  but  also 
the  most  numerous  class  of  functionaries,  and  that  the 

1  In  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  38  f.  Jensen  unnecessarily  doubts  the  reference  to 
Elam. 

2  E.g.  S"  89. 

8  Cf.  the  cognate  Hebrew  and  Aramaean 


116  LAGASH   AN  INDEPENDENT   STATE  BOOK  II 

essential  attribute  of  their  office  was  that  they  were  repre- 
sentatives and  agents  of  the  gods,  the  word  came  to  have 
the  sense  of  official  or  minister.1  It  is,  however,  in  the 
primary  and  proper  sense  that  the  princes  of  Lagash  use 
the  term  with  reference  to  themselves ;  that  is  to  say,  they 
describe  themselves  as  being,  in  their  capacity  of  rulers, 
regents  of  the  gods,  by  virtue  of  their  being  first  and  fore- 
most priests.  The  suitableness  of  the  designation  can  be 
fully  appreciated  only  upon  a  reading  of  their  inscriptions. 
Here  it  will  suffice  to  point  out  that  they  write  of  them- 
selves as  being  simply  and  solely  vicegerents  of  the  gods ; 
and  accordingly  their  whole  talk  is  of  temples  and  sacri- 
fices, and  of  their  devoutness  in  seeing  that  these  cardinal 
agencies,  or  rather  elements,  of  religion  were  conserved 
and  extended.  We  are  now  enabled  to  get  a  more  com- 
prehensive and  at  the  same  time  a  more  accurate  view  of 
the  jurisdiction  and  policy  of  these  most  remarkable  of 
ancient  rulers.  Vassalage  to  any  suzerain  whatever  is 
out  of  the  question.  It  is  not  demanded  by  their  favourite 
title,  as  we  have  just  shown ;  nor  is  it  compatible  with  the 
general  conditions  of  the  kingdom.  Dependence  upon 
Ur,  even  in  the  disguise  of  vassalage  to  its  gods,2  was  not 
yet  possible,  since,  as  will  be  presently  shown,  the  latter 
city  did  not  attain  to  predominance  till  after  the  days  of 
Xabu.  Nor  is  there  any  likelihood  that  homage  in  any 
form  was  paid  to  the  old  kingdom  of  Akkad,  as  some 3 
have  supposed,  since  if  this  monarchy  was  at  all  existent 
at  this  time,  it  was  a  mere  shadow  of  its  former  self,  and 
it  is  utterly  unthinkable  that  an  Oriental  community 
should  acknowledge  the  suzerainty  of  an  inferior  moribund 
power.  But  in  any  case,  there  could  be  no  rival  in  the 
period  under  review  to  the  dominion  of  these  princes  of 
Lagash  themselves.  Their  unrestricted  activity,  and  their 
influence  over  what  must  have  been  virtually  then  the 

1  Cf.  KB.  Ill,  1.  p.  6  (Jensen). 

2  Jensen  in  KB.  I.e. 

8  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  329  f.     Winckler,  GBA.  p.  42. 


Cn.  II,  §  100     POWER   OF   THE   RELIGIOUS   MOTIVE  117 

whole  of  the  civilized  world,  puts  political  competition, 
not  to  speak  of  superiority,  on  the  part  of  any  other 
community,  entirely  out  of  the  question. 

§  99.  It  would  be  a  profitable  task  to  consider  the 
source  and  motive  of  such  an  extension  of  influence,  and 
of  such  a  marvellous  forth-putting  of  energy,  as  we  have 
seen  manifested  in  the  rulers  of  Akkad  and  its  successor 
in  South  Babylonia.  The  predominant,  or  rather  exclu- 
sive, tone  of  the  extant  inscriptions  reveals  the  secret,  and 
at  the  same  time  furnishes  the  key  not  only  to  Babylonian 
but  to  ancient  Oriental  history  in  general.  Everything  in 
political  and  social  life  turned  upon  what  was  more  funda- 
mental and  vital  to  the  existence  of  the  state  than  trade 
or  manufactures  or  war  or  diplomacy;  namely,  religion. 
The  world  was  ransacked  for  the  finest  and  most  enduring 
of  woods  for  temples  and  altars  and  palaces  erected  for  the 
gods  or  their  human  representatives.  The  quarries  and 
the  mines  of  the  West-land  yielded  stone  for  their  images, 
and  statues  and  gems  for  their  adornment.  Religion  was, 
in  a  word,  the  be  all  and  the  end  all  of  life  and  govern- 
ment to  these  first  founders  of  states  and  empires.  The 
very  completeness  of  their  sway  in  Western  Asia,  and  the 
evident  facility  with  which  it  was  extended,  is  proof  of 
the  intensity  of  their  religious  devotion,  in  which,  as  in 
other  things,  they  set  an  example  to  be  followed  with 
greater  or  less  success,  but  with  unvarying  consistency  and 
singleness  of  aim,  till  the  latest  Semitic  times  (cf.  §  93). 

§  100.  While  dependence  on  any  foreign  power  is  thus 
out  of  the  question  for  Nabu,  the  same  thing  cannot  be 
asserted  of  his  successors,  of  several  of  whom  brief  inscrip- 
tions have  been  unearthed.  Soon  after  the  time  of  Nabu, 
the  rulers  of  Lagash,  still  bearing  the  same  title  of 
"priest-regent,"  are  found  dedicating  treasures  of  art  to 
the  kings  of  Ur,  and  thereby  indicate  the  suzerainty  of  the 
latter.  We  have  accordingly  to  assume  that  the  centre  of 
authority  for  South  Babylonia,  and  apparently  also  for  the 
whole  eastern  Semitic  world,  was  transferred  to  this 


118  UR   OF   THE   CHALDEES  BOOK  II 

famous  city.  "  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  "  is  the  name  b}^  which 
the  home  of  Abraham's  ancestors  is  called  in  Genesis,  in 
allusion  to  the  people  who  were  in  power  in  that  region  at 
the  time  of  the  composition  of  this  section  of  the  book. 
But  in  the  age  of  the  world  of  which  we  are  now  treating, 
the  Chaldees,  if  they  existed  at  all  as  a  separate  people, 
were  only  known  as  an  insignificant  clan.  It  was  not  till 
about  two  thousand  years  later  that  they  are  mentioned  in 
the  annals  of  the  country,  though  they  came  in  course  of 
time  to  found  the  most  powerful  and  opulent  empire  that 
the  ancient  Semites  ever  established.  Ur  is  now  repre- 
sented by  the  extensive  ruins  of  Mugheir  (i.e.  "place  of 
bitumen").  Its  situation  marks  it  as  having  been  in  its 
time  the  most  important  commercial  city  of  Lower  Baby- 
lonia. It  lay  on  the  southern  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  the 
nearest  city  of  Babylonia  to  Arabia,  and  accordingly  the 
entrepot  to  the  important  trade  with  the  interior  of  that 
vast  region.  It  was  also  one  of  the  chief  gulf  ports, 
answering  in  this  respect  to  Basra  of  the  present  day. 
The  great  canal  Pallakopas l  flowed  past  it,  connecting  it 
directly  with  Babylon  and  the  Gulf;  while  two  other  large 
canals,  represented  by  the  modern  Shatt-en-Nil  and  Shatt- 
el-Hai,  united  with  the  Euphrates  in  its  neighbourhood 
on  the  northern  side  of  the  river.  Commensurate  with  its 
commercial  was  its  religious  importance.  As  the  chief 
seat  of  the  worship  of  the  Moon-god  Sin,  the  patron  of 
travellers  and  merchants,  it  was  to  Babylonia  what  Harran 
(Haran),  the  greatest  inland  trading-place  of  all  Western 
Asia,  and,  moreover,  a  pilgrim  shrine  of  the  same  imme- 
morial Semitic  deity,  was  to  Mesopotamia  (§  75). 

§  101.  Under  "  Ur-gur  "  (perhaps  to  be  read  Amel-Ea, 
"servant  of  Ea  "),  the  earliest  known  king  of  Ur,  that  city 
had  already  attained  to  undisputed  pre-eminence  in  Baby- 
lonia. Like  the  rest  of  his  kind,  Ur-gur  was  noted  for 
temple-building,  to  which  his  extant  inscriptions,  found  on 
the  site  of  the  several  edifices  which  he  commemorates, 

1  Probably  the  "  Pishon  "  of  Gen.  ii. ;  see  Par.  73  ff. 


CH.  II,  §  101  EXTENT   OF   ITS    DOMAIN  119 


refer  without  exception.  While  several  of  these  have 
been  found  in  the  mound  of  Mugheir,  which  marks  the 
site  of  the  great  temple  of  Sin,  others  have  been  unearthed 
at  Erech,  the  city  of  Ishtar,  Larsa,  the  chief  seat  of  the 
Sun-god  in  South  Babylonia,  and  Nippur,  the  favourite 
abode  of  Bel  (§  94).  Nippur,  on  the  border  of  North 
Babylonia,  was  therefore  under  the  control  of  the  kings  of 
Ur,  as  the  favourite  title,  added  to  the  designation  "  King 
of  Ur,"  clearly  attests.  I  refer  to  the  famous  formula 
"King  of  Simmer  and  Akkad,"  whose  significance  will  be 
considered  later  (§  110,  cf.  102).  Their  jurisdiction  over 
North  Babylonia  must  have  amounted  to  some  form  of 
permanent  suzerainty.  A  more  definite  idea  may  be  ob- 
tained of  conditions  nearer  home;  for  the  impartial  devo- 
tion to  the  local  cults,  just  alluded  to  as  being  manifested 
by  the  kings  of  Ur,  is  a  proof  of  a  political  consolidation  of 
the  leading  cities  such  as  had  been  already  exemplified  on 
a  smaller  scale  by  Lagash.  —  A  word  should  be  said  here 
of  these  ancient  centres  of  civilization.  Erech  was  one  of 
the  most  sacred  of  all  cities  to  the  ancient  Babylonians. 
The  special  form  of  the  name  we  get  from  the  received  Old 
Testament  text,  where  it  is  mentioned  along  with  Babylon, 
Akkad,  and  Calneh,  as  one  of  the  principal  seats  of  the 
dominion  of  Nimrod  (Gen.  x.  10).  The  ancient  Baby- 
lonian name  was  Uruk^  which  may  also  have  been  the 
form  of  the  word  in  the  original  text  of  Genesis,  as  it  is 
confirmed  by  the  'Ope%  of  the  LXX  and  the  classical 
'0/3^077,  as  well  as  the  modern  Warka  which  stands  on  its 
site.  It  lay  on  the  northern  side  of  the  Euphrates,  between 
the  river  and  the  Shatt-en-Nil,  about  thirty  miles  northwest 
of  Ur.  As  the  first  large  city  of  South  Babylonia  to  be 
reached  in  the  descent  of  the  Euphrates,  its  intercourse 
with  North  Babylonia  was  close  and  frequent.  But  the 
strongest  bond  between  Erech  and  the  rest  of  the  whole 

1  The  Massoretic  form  appears  again  in  the  adjective,  Ezra  iv.  9  (E.V. 
Archevites  !),  and  singularly  enough  a  late  Assyrian  form  (cf.  Par.  221) 
agrees  with  it.  Does  the  word  in  Genesis  represent  a  late  tradition? 


120  ERECH,  LAHSA,  AND   ERIDU  BOOK  II 

country  was  its  worship  of  Ishtar,  the  one  universally 
adored  North-Semitic  female  divinity.  She  was  here 
reverenced  and  served  under  the  name  Nana,  as  in  Akkad 
under  the  title  Anunit  (§  94).  An  evidence  of  the 
prestige  of  this  immemorial  shrine  is  the  care  with  which 
the  lords  of  Ur  maintained  and  frequented  it:  but  the 
most  signal  indications  are  those  furnished  by  the  hymns 
and  the  epic  poem  which  became  a  part  of  the  national 
literature,  and  in  which  the  sufferings  of  the  people  of 
Babylonia,  under  the  galling  yoke  of  the  Elamites  in  the 
twenty-third  century  B.C.,  are  imaged  forth  in  the  devasta- 
tion of  Erech  and  the  anger  of  the  exiled  goddess  (§  107). 
The  extensive  site  of  the  city,  crowned  by  the  lofty  ruins 
of  the  magnificent  temple  of  Ishtar,  have  not  furnished 
historical  material  proportioned  to  their  importance.  Some 
of  the  inscriptions,  however,  are  of  great  interest.  One, 
with  extremely  antique  characters,  belongs  to  the  early 
stage  of  independence  before  the  subjection  to  Ur,  and  is 
further  of  importance  since  its  language  is  unmistakably 
Semitic.  It  may  thus  be  put  side  by  side  with  the  relics 
of  the  dynasty  of  Akkad  as  indispensable  proof  of  the  very 
ancient  predominance  of  the  Semites  in  Southern  as  well 
as  in  Northern  Babylonia.  —  The  city  of  Larsa  lay  not  more 
than  fifteen  miles  east  of  Erech,  also  on  the  Shatt-en-Nil, 
on  the  site  of  the  modern  Senkereh.  It  was  to  South 
Babjdonia,  in  the  religious  sphere,  what  Sippar  was  to 
North  Babylonia,  the  central  seat  of  the  worship  of  the 
Sun-god.  Always  of  note  in  this  respect,  it  attained 
also  to  high  political  influence  at  two  periods  to  be  men- 
tioned later.  It  was  undoubtedly  the  Elasar  of  Gen.  xiv. 
(§  108  f.).  Its  temple  of  Blt-8amds  (  =  Beth-Shemesh)  was 
famous,  at  least  from  the  days  of  Ur-gur,  who  was,  perhaps, 
its  founder.  Some  of  the  most  famous  monarchs  till  the 
end  of  Babylonian  history  were  its  zealous  restorers  and 
worshippers  at  its  shrine.  —  Another  ancient  city  famous 
for  its  sanctity  was  Eridu,  situated  "at  the  mouth  of  the 
Rivers,"  the  modern  Abu-Shahrain.  It  was  sacred  to  the 
good  god  Ea  (§  112). 


CH.  II,  §  102         EXTENSION  OF   UR   NORTHWARD  121 


§  102.  The  dominion  of  the  dynasty  of  Ur,  which  may 
thus  be  taken  as  the  legitimate  successor  of  that  of  Lagash, 
was  continued  by  Ba'ukm  (written  Dun-gi),  the  son  of 
Ur-gur.  He  also  divided  his  activity  between  the  care 
and  patronage  of  Ur  and  of  the  subject  cities.  In  addi- 
tion to  inscriptions  of  his  found  in  Ur  and  Erech,  two  have 
been  unearthed  in  Cutha  (§  94),  written  in  whole  or  in 
part  in  unmistakable  Semitic.  In  one  of  these  he  gives 
himself  the  title  of  "  King  of  the  four  quarters  of  the 
world."  This  remarkable  title,  borne  already  by  Naram- 
Sin,  was  the  proper  designation  of  the  kings  who  ruled  in 
North  Babylonia,  just  as  the  kings  of  Ur  called  themselves 
"Kings  of  Shumer  and  Akkad"  (§101).  Now  as  the 
former  designation  is  appropriated  by  Ba'ukin,  we  must 
infer  that  the  present  dynasty  of  Ur  had  not  only  become 
supreme  in  South  Babylonia,  but  had  fallen  heir  also  to 
the  old  dominion  of  the  kings  of  Akkad.  There  seems, 
in  fact,  to  have  been  a  temporary  unification  of  the  whole 
of  Babylonia  under  the  hegemony  of  Ur.  That  a  similar 
state  of  things  prevailed  under  the  rule  of  Sargon  and 
Naram-Sin,  with  the  leadership  in  North  Babylonia,  we 
have  already  seen  to  have  been  as  good  as  established 
(§  91).  It  may  be  remarked  in  passing  that  the  kingly 
titles  just  quoted  were  assumed  by  the  kings  who  ruled 
later  in  Babylon  over  a  united  empire,  and  that  they  were 
exploited  by  the  kings  of  Assyria  also,  when  they  came  to 
rule  over  Babylonia.  In  this,  as  often  since  and  elsewhere 
in  the  world's  history,  reverence  for  the  relics  and  associa- 
tions of  a  sacred  antiquity  was  found  to  be  a  most  excel- 
lent instrument  of  self-aggrandisement.  A  tradition,  not 
altogether  ignoble,  was  gradually  established,  that  there 
could  be  only  one  rightful  heir  to  the  glory  and  sanctity  of 
the  holy  Babylonian  empire.  Such  a  sentiment,  cherished 
till  the  latest  Semitic  times,  gave  definiteness  and  coher- 
ence to  the  ambitions  of  successive  rulers  and  dynasties, 
and  made  possible  the  permanent  establishment  of  one 
great  dominion  in  Western  Asia. 


122  A  TIME    OF  APPARENT  DECLINE  BOOK  II 

§  103.  However  powerful  this  first  dynasty  of  Ur  may 
have  been  in  Babylonia,  we  have  as  yet  no  trace  of  an 
extension  of  dominion  to  the  far  West  or  even  beyond  the 
limits  of  the  River-land.  Indeed,  we  have  to  wait  for 
several  hundred  years  before  definite  evidence  is  afforded 
of  anything  like  the  old  world-subduing  enterprise  of  the 
kings  of  Akkad.  When  we  add  to  this  that  there  was 
also,  after  the  times  of  the  rulers  of  Lagash,  no  progress 
made  in  the  products  of  art,  the  significance  of  the  long 
retrogression  at  once  suggests  itself.  There  was,  it  would 
seem,  a  period  in  the  history  of  Babylonia  between  the  fifth 
and  fourth  millenniums  B.C.,  whose  achievements  were 
not  equalled  in  the  following  millennium.  It  was  not 
merely  that  the  area  of  warlike  enterprise  was  greatly 
circumscribed.  What  is  more  worthy  of  note  is  the 
decline  in  commerce  and  manufactures  and  in  the  aesthetic 
arts.  The  subject  is  wide  and  vague,  and  easily  lends 
itself  to  aimless  speculation.  Yet  it  is  perhaps  more  than 
a  coincidence  that  the  creative  period  in  Babylonia  should 
have  apparently  been  nearly  contemporary  with  a  similar 
epoch  in  Egypt,  and  that  both  of  these  eras  lie  on  the 
border  of  the  ages  which  we  are  as  yet  obliged  to  call 
prehistoric. 

§  104.  The  age  of  this  dynasty  of  Ur  cannot  be  exactly 
determined.  We  may,  however,  safely  enough  put  it 
somewhere  between  2900  and  2500  B.C.  Thereupon  fol- 
lowed a  period  marked  by  the  transference  of  dominion 
from  Ur  to  the  important  city  of  Isin,  whose  site  has  not 
yet  been  ascertained.  Its  rulers,  whose  inscriptions  have 
been  found  in  Mugheir x  (Ur)  and  Nuffar 2  (Nippur),  call 
themselves  kings  of  Isin  as  well  as  of  Shumer  and  Akkad. 
They  claim  lordship  also  by  various  titles,  over  Ur,  Eridu, 
and  even  Nippur,  so  that  their  predominance  is  unques- 
tioned. They  seem  to  have  drawn  their  origin  from  Nip- 

1  Published  in  I  R.  2  and  5  and  IV  R.  35. 

2  Published  in  OBT.  I,  PI.  9-13.     The  possession  of  Nippur  by  these 
kings  explains  the  title  "  king  of  Shumer  and  Akkad"  (§  110). 


CH.  II,  §  105  ISIN,    UR,    ERECH,    AND   LARSA  123 

pur,  since  that  city  stands  first  in  the  list  of  subject 
districts,1  and  Isin  itself  may  therefore  be  assumed  to  have 
stood  not  far  to  the  south  of  Nuffar.  The  last  of  the  kings 
known  to  us  bears  the  name  Isme  Dagdn  ("Dagon  has 
heard")  written  syllabically,  though  his  inscription  and 
those  of  his  predecessors  are  written  ideographically.  This 
fact,  which  the  Sumeriologists  tako  for  a  sign  of  the 
encroachment  of  the  Semitic  Babylonians  upon  the  Sume- 
rians,  appears  to  indicate  merely  the  progress  southward  of 
phonetic  writing,  which  was  developed  earlier  in  North 
than  in  South  Babylonia.  Very  little  can  be  learned  of 
the  history  of  this  regime.  It  was  succeeded  by  a  second 
dynasty  of  Ur,  which  was  apparently  a  continuation  of  the 
dynasty  of  Isin.  The  predominance  of  the  element  Sin  in 
the  names  of  its  rulers  (Bur-Sin,  Gramil(?~)-iSin,  Sin-iddiri) 
has  been  thought  to  show  that  North  Babylonia  was  their 
home,  since  the  Moon-god  was  worshipped  there  particularly 
under  that  epithet.2  More  significant  is  the  fact  that  their 
names  are  written  phonetically,  while  the  inscriptions 
themselves  are  still  ideographic,  since,  as  remarked  above, 
the  advance  to  phonetic  writing  was  made  much  earlier 
in  the  north  than  in  the  south.  Very  instructive  also  is 
the  illustration  of  the  same  usage  from  Erech.  Here  an 
independent,  perhaps  local,  dynasty  was  bearing  sway 
concurrently,  as  it  would  seem,  with  one  of  the  kingdoms 
last  mentioned.  Its  rulers  have  also  Semitic  names  writ- 
ten phonetically,  while  their  inscriptions  are  ideographic. 
Apparently  this  dynasty  of  Erech  was  absorbed  in  the 
second  of  Ur,  for  which  it  doubtless  prepared  the  way. 
These  later  dynasties  ran  till  after  2400  B.C.  The  next 
ruling  power  had  its  centre  in  Larsa  (§  101).  Its  brief 
predominance  was  cut  short  by  the  Elamites  (see  §  108). 
§  105.  Before  passing  to  the  next  period  of  Babylonian 
history  it  will  be  in  place  to  say  a  word  by  way  of  retro- 
spective summary.  We  have  seen  that  supreme  power  was 
first  wielded  over  a  wide  area,  extending  far  beyond  the 

1  See  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  339.  2  Winckler,  GBA.  p.  47. 


124  REVIEW   OF   PROGRESS  BOOK  II 

bounds  of  the  River  region,  by  a  kingdom  having  its 
centre  in  North  Babylonia.  Then,  after  an  unknown 
number  of  centuries,  a  southern  principality  appears  as  the 
leading  power,  exercising  an  authority  scarcely  less  than 
that  of  its  predecessor.  Thereafter  we  find  a  succession 
of  monarchies  securing  predominance,  among  which  the 
extreme  southern  city  of  Ur  is  foremost  in  range  and  dura- 
tion of  influence.  Again  we  observe  that  while  the  centre 
of  control  is  first  in  the  north  and  then  in  the  south,  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  leading  state  in  either  case  is  not  con- 
fined to  its  own  proper  region ;  the  kings  of  Akkad  bore 
sway  in  Nippur  in  the  central  region,  and  so  also  in  their 
turn  did  the  kings  of  Ur.  If  we  seek  to  know  the  relative 
eras  of  development,  we  have  the  surest  confirmation  of 
the  dates  obtained  from  Nabonidus  (§  88),  in  the  testi- 
mony afforded  by  the  progress  of  the  art  of  writing.  In 
the  inscriptions  of  Sargon  and  Naram-Sin  we  see  the 
phonetic  method  of  syllabic  writing  already  brought  to 
perfection.  In  the  south  we  find  the  primitive  ideographic 
system  consistently  retained,  eked  out  in  many  words  by 
an  extension  of  the  same  ideographic  or  symbolizing  idea 
in  the  form  of  an  apparatus  of  explanatory  prefixes  or 
suffixes.  The  latter  mode  of  expressing  ideas  is  seen  to 
be  less  advanced  than  the  alphabetic  because  it  is  less 
clear  and  in  all  respects  more  clumsy.  Moreover,  a  lan- 
guage written  according  to  this  method  is  much  less  easy 
to  be  learned  by  or  to  be  taught  to  foreigners.  Hence  the 
fact  that  the  phonetic  system  prevailed  so  early  in  North 
Babylonia  and  eastward  over  the  Tigris  (§  92)  is  signifi- 
cant of  the  cosmopolitan  relations  of  the  ancient  kingdom 
of  Akkad.  Progress  accordingly  was  made,  as  the  Book 
of  Genesis  also  indicates,1  from  the  north  southward,  and 
we  can  have  no  hesitation  in  vindicating  for  the  region 
north  of  Babylon  the  claim  put  forth  in  Genesis,  that  the 


1  That  is,  the  movement  was  from  a  location  near  the  approach  of  the 
Rivers  (Gen.  ii.  10)  towards  Shinar  (Gen.  xi.),  or  the  region  about 
Babylon  (§  110). 


CH.  II,  §  106  COUNTRY   OF   ELAM  125 

seat  of  the  earliest  civilization  was  the  place  of  the  parting 
of  the  Rivers.  We  may,  at  least,  say  with  confidence, 
that  in  this  portion  of  the  River  country,  where  the 
streams  lie  nearest  together,  it  was  most  easy  and  natural 
to  utilize  the  conditions  that  were  so  favourable  for  the 
successive  development  of  agriculture,  inland  navigation, 
trade,  and  manufactures;  and  may  also  point  to  the  fact 
that  the  earliest  recorded  civilization  had  its  home  in  that 
very  region,  where  it  comes  to  view  as  in  many  respects  a 
finished  product  with  a  past  behind  it  of  indefinite  dura- 
tion, and  an  unknown  number  of  stages  of  development.1 
§  106.  In  the  earlier  history  of  the  independent  Baby- 
lonian monarchies,  signs  were  not  wanting  of  conflicts 
with  the  people  beyond  the  Tigris  (see  §  92,  98).  Elain 
was  the  name  (meaning  "  highland  ")  originally  given  to 
the  country  lying  at  the  foot  of  the  most  westerly  range  of 
the  mountains  of  Media.  The  more  southerly  region, 
stretching  along  the  Gulf  southeastward  from  the  mouth 
of  the  Tigris,  was  known  from  very  early  times  as  Anshan 
(§  98),  a  name  which  was  locally  retained  even  to  the 
Persian  times.  Elam,  however,  was  the  designation 
employed  by  the  Semites  generally  for  the  whole  district, 
including  both  mountain  and  plain,  and  in  the  same  sense 
we  have  to  understand  the  frequent  references  to  Elam 
made  in  the  Old  Testament.  To  Herodotus  the  country 
was  known  as  Kissia,  and  to  the  later  Greeks  as  Susiana, 
from  the  name  of  the  capital  Susa,  the  Shushan  of  the 
Bible.  In  very  early  times  the  whole  of  Elam  seems  to 
have  been  frequently  under  the  dominion  of  one  ruler,  and 
it  must  be  credited  with  a  national  development  reaching 
back  to  very  early  Babylonian  times.  For  cultivation  and 
settled  habitation  it  compares  favourably  with  any  part  of 

1  Hilprecht's  inference  (OBT.  I,  p.  22,  n.  2),  from  the  Semitic  character 
of  the  Gute  (§  92),  "in  favour  of  a  migration  of  the  Semites  into  Baby- 
lonia from  the  north,"  is  perhaps  premature.  The  progress  of  civilization, 
at  least,  was  both  southward  and  northward  from  Akkad.  The  larger 
question  (of  §  21)  is  of  course  still  in  doubt. 


126  SUBJUGATION   BY   ELAM  BOOK  II' 

the  East;  the  fertility  of  the  lowlands,  watered  by  the 
Uknu  (Choaspes,  modern  Kercha),  and  the  Ulai  (Dan. 
viii.  2,  16,  Eulseus,  modern  Karun),  rivalled  that  of 
Babylonia,  and  the  coolness  of  the  highlands  made  them 
an  enviable  residence.  In  the  twenty-third  century  B.C., 
Elam  appears  to  have  stood  at  the  summit  of  its  power. 
It  was,  at  any  rate,  at  that  time  that  it  intervened  with 
most  effect  in  Babylonian  affairs.  At  the  opening  of  this 
century,  the  last  ruling  dynasty  of  which  we  have  taken 
note  (§  104)  came  to  an  end,  and  it  was  succeeded  by  no 
native  regime  sufficiently  strong  to  keep  the  control  of 
the  kindred  cities  and  principalities  out  of  the  hands  of 
powerful  foreigners  such  as  the  Elamites. 

§  107.  We  have  to  picture  to  ourselves  the  subjugation 
of  the  country,  not  as  having  been  accomplished  by  a  single 
decisive  stroke,  but  by  a  series  of  invasions.  We  are  for- 
tunately informed  as  to  the  time  and  circumstances  of  one 
of  the  most  important  of  these  incursions.  A  notice  by 
Asshurbanipal,  king  of  Assyria,  written  about  650  B.C.,1 
tells  us  that  he  recovered  from  Susa  a  statue  of  the  goddess 
Nana  (Ishtar,  §  101),  which  the  Elamitic  king  Kudur- 
nanJmndi  had  taken  away  from  her  temple  at  Erech  1635 
years  before.  The  conquest  which  ensued  was  doubtless 
of  the  normal  Oriental  character,  and  the  oppression  of  the 
Babylonians  has  left  its  traces  in  a  most  interesting  and 
even  pathetic  fashion  in  the  literature  which  owed  much 
of  its  inspiration  to  the  national  sufferings  of  this  memor- 
able epoch.  To  a  people  like  the  Babylonians,  the  rigour 
of  a  foreign  yoke  was  naturally  felt  most  deeply  in  the 
sphere  of  religion,  in  the  desecration  and  spoliation  of  the 
shrines,  whose  erection,  equipment,  and  embellishment 
had  formed  the  chief  care  of  the  native  princes  from  the 
remotest  epochs,  and  at  the  same  time  had  proved  the  most 
potent  means  of  binding  together  the  elements  of  the 
several  independent  communities.  Of  this  feeling  we 
have  an  instance  in  the  contents  of  the  famous  "Nimrod" 

1  V  R.  0,  107  ff. 


CH.  II,  §  108          EXTENT   OF   THE   OCCUPATION  127 

epic.  The  motive  of  this  most  ancient  of  epics  is  drawn 
from  the  Elamitic  occupation  of  this  same  city  of  Erech, 
when  the  tyrant  Humbaba,  a  successor  of  Kudur-nanchundi, 
is  described  as  a  ruthless  oppressor,  who  has  brought  deso- 
lation and  distress  upon  the  people,  as  well  as  disgrace 
upon  the  exiled  goddess  Ishtar.  In  the  same  poem,  the 
deliverance  effected  by  the  hero  has  as  its  basis  the  his- 
torical fact  of  the  gradual  subjugation  and  expulsion  of 
the  hated  foreigners.  Moreover,  certain  omen-tablets  con- 
tain a  reference  to  a  similar  deportation  to  Elam  of  the 
image  of  Bel,  and  in  addition  some  touching  hymns  bewail 
the  devastation  of  the  land  and  the  profanation  of  the 
temples.1 

§  108.  The  spoliation  of  Bel  just  alluded  to  would 
seem  to  show  that  the  city  of  Nippur  (§  94),  the  chief  seat 
of  his  worship,  came  also  under  the  dominion  of  the 
Eastern  invaders.  This  would  imply  the  conquest  of  both 
North  and  South  Babylonia.  We  are  also  in  a  position  to 
show  further  the  extent  of  the  Elamitic  occupation,  and 
thus  to  read  more  intelligently  that  passage  in  the  annals 
of  the  Hebrews  which  has  to  do  with  the  condition  of 
things  in  Western  Asia,  as  related  to  the  fortunes  of  their 
great  ancestor  Abraham.  There  is,  in  fact,  for  this  epoch, 
a  rare  concurrence  of  various  lines  of  testimony.  Inscrip- 
tions have  been  found  of  Elamitic  rulers  in  Babylonia 
which  clearly  show  that  they  actually  did  occupy  Erech 
and  Nippur,  and  give  us  details  as  to  the  nature  and  range 
of  their  occupation.  The  centre  of  their  authority  was 
Larsa.  This  city  had  arisen,  just  before  the  invasion,  to 
a  leading  position  in  Babylonia,  for  the  last  king  of  the 
second  dynasty  of  Ur  (§  104)  calls  himself2  "king  of 
Larsa";  he  bears  the  Semitic  name  Nur-Ramman,  and 
writes  ideographically,  as  does  also  his  son  and  successor, 
Sin-iddin.  The  latter  calls  himself  king  of  Larsa  and  also 
"king  of  Shumer  and  Akkad  "  (§  110),  so  that  we  have 
abundant  proof  of  a  new  realm  in  Babylonia,  with  Larsa 

i  Cf.  Hornmel,  GBA.  343  ff.  2  I  R.  2,  Nr.  IV. 


128  LARSA  AND  ITS   KINGS  BOOK  II 

as  the  capital.  Ur,  where  the  inscriptions  of  these  kings 
of  Larsa  have  been  found,  was  the  second  city  of  impor- 
tance, as  being  the  home  of  the  dynasty.  When  the 
Elamites  occupied  Larsa,  they  came  into  the  country  under 
the  leadership  of  Kudur-mabug,  whose  name  reveals  a 
close  association  with  that  of  the  conqueror  of  Erech.  In 
a  surviving  inscription  l  of  his,  also  found  in  Ur,  he  dedi- 
cates a  temple  in  that  city  to  the  god  Sin,  with  a  prayer 
in  behalf  of  his  son,  a  namesake  of  that  deity,  Rim-Sin, 
or  rather  Erim-Aku,2  the  "  Arioch,  king  of  Elasar"  (Larsa) 
of  Gen.  xiv.  The  latter  prince,  while  maintaining  a 
special  regard  for  Ur  and  its  patron  deity,  proclaims  him- 
self also  king  of  Larsa.  That  he  also  rightly  styles 
himself  "king  of  Shumer  and  Akkad"  is  indicated  by  his 
jurisdiction  over  and  care  for  the  other  famous  cities  from 
Eridu  to  Nippur  (cf.  §  101),  whose  historic  roles  had 
already  been  played.  These  kings  evidently  followed  in 
the  steps  of  their  Babylonian  predecessors  in  all  principal 
matters  of  religious  and  general  policy,  so  that  if  it  were 
not  for  the  illustrative  literature  already  quoted,  one  would 
readily  believe  that  their  sway  was  as  acceptable  to  the 
people  as  could  have  been  that  of  home-born  sovereigns. 
If  we  may  judge  from  the  case  of  Erech  (§  107),  it  would 
seem  that  the  viceroys  appointed  over  the  several  cities 
were  also  Elamites  and  petty  tyrants.  In  the  eyes  of  the 
people  this  whole  set  of  rulers  were  lacking  in  the  prestige 
that  had  always  invested  the  hereditary  guardians  of  the 
immemorial  shrines  of  the  gods  of  the  land. 

§  109.  The  chief  interest  which  attaches  to  these  for- 
eign princes  arises  from  their  connection  with  Biblical 
history  just  alluded  to.  In  Gen.  xiv.  we  read  that,  in  the 
days  of  Amraphel,  king  of  Shinar,  Arioch,  king  of  Elasar,3 
Chedorlaomer,  king  of  Elam,  and  Targal,4  king  of  Goyim, 

1  I  R.  2,  NT.  III. 

2  Aku  or  dgu,  the  moon's  disk,  is  a  synonym  of  Sin.     For  the  loss  of 
m  in  pronunciation  between  vowels  (=  v,  w),  see  Delitzsch,  Ass.  Gr.  §  49a. 

3  So  read  by  LXX  (Lucian) .  *  So  read  by  LXX. 


CH.  II,  §  110  EXPEDITIONS  TO  PALESTINE  129 

these  kings  made  war  with  Bera,  king  of  Sodom,  and  four 
neighbouring  princes;  that  the  latter,  as  the  result  of  com- 
mon defeat  in  battle,  came  into  subjection  to  the  former 
for  twelve  years ;  that  in  the  thirteenth  year  they  rebelled ; 
and  that,  in  the  fourteenth  year,  "  Chedorlaomer  and  the 
kings  who  were  with  him  "  invaded  Palestine,  and  after 
subduing  or  ravaging  the  whole  country  east  of  Jordan 
and  west  of  the  Dead  Sea  southward  to  Mount  Seir,  again 
defeated  the  same  confederation  of  kings,  and  were  return- 
ing homeward  with  the  spoil  when  they  were  overtaken 
near  the  cit}r  of  Dan  by  Abram  the  Hebrew  with  a  hasty 
levy  of  his  own  servants,  who  routed  them  in  a  night 
attack,  pursued  them  to  the  north  of  Damascus,  and  recov- 
ered the  prisoners  and  the  booty.  From  this  it  appears 
that  the  invasion  and  subjugation  of  the  West-land  were 
undertaken  at  the  instance  of  the  king  of  Elam;  for  though 
the  king  of  Shinar,  or  North  Babylonia,  is  mentioned  first 
in  v.  1,  the  subsequent  allusions  to  the  eastern  allies  (vs. 
5,  9)  indicate  clearly  the  leadership  of  the  Elamite.  The 
first  thing  to  be  noticed  is  that  the  confederation  consisted 
mainly  of  Babylonians,  under  their  suzerain  the  Elamite. 
For  though  the  people  last  in  the  list,  the  "Goyim,"  can- 
not be  identified  with  certainty,1  the  other  two  parties 
represent  inhabitants  of  North  and  South  Babylonia  respec- 
tively. That  is  to  say,  if  it  is  right  to  identify  Arioch 
with  Erim-Aku,  and  Elasar  with  Larsa,  the  matter  is  dis- 
posed of  as  far  as  South  Babylonia  is  concerned,  while  it 
is  unquestionable  that  in  the  mind  of  the  Biblical  narrator, 
Shinar  was  nearly  equivalent  to  North  Babylonia.  The 
latter  point  invites  a  brief  discussion. 

§  110.  It  was  long  ago  conjectured  that  the  Shinar  of 
Genesis  and  the  Sumer  of  the  Inscriptions  were  originally 
identical.  Let  us  see  what  the  two  terms  connote  in  the 

1  The  "  Goyim"  have  been  supposed  to  be  the  people  of  Gute  (§  92). 
As  far  as  the  form  of  the  word  is  concerned,  this  is  indeed  quite  possible, 
if  we  assume  that  the  tradition  regarded  the  second  syllable  of  the  original 
name  as  a  feminine  ending,  and  the  first  syllable  as  the  stem. 

K 


130  SHUMER   AND   AKKAD  BOOK  II 

respective  literatures.  It  has  been  already  stated  (§  80) 
that  Simmer  is  generally  held  to  have  been  a  designation 
of  Southern  Babylonia.  Yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is 
as  yet  no  decisive  evidence  as  to  its  location.  The  strongest 
argument  for  the  current  view  is  the  fact  that  the  phrase, 
"king  of  Simmer  and  Akkad,"  was  first  used  by  monarchs 
whose  capitals,  beginning  with  Ur,  lay  in  South  Baby- 
lonia.1 But  there  is  really  nothing  to  show  that  either 
Simmer  or  Akkad  belonged  to  or  included  any  portion  of 
the  south  land.2  For  Akkad,  after  what  has  been  said 
above  (§  94),  the  notion  may  be  dismissed  at  once.  The 
simple  facts  with  regard  to  the  usage  of  the  much  mis- 
interpreted phrase  are  these.  The  kings  of  Ur  of  both 
dynasties,  and  those  of  Isin,  as  a  rule,  attach  to  their  own 
proper  titles  ("king  of  Ur,"  "king  of  Isin")  the  additional 
dignity  of  "king  of  Simmer  and  Akkad."  Some  of  them 
vary  the  decoration  by  employing  instead  the  title  "king  of 
the  four  quarters  of  the  world."  When  the  latter  is  used, 
it  simply  means  that  they  claimed  for  themselves  authority 
over  at  least  the  central  district  of  the  old  kingdom  of 
Akkad  (cf.  §  90),  and  not  only  so,  but  actually  possessed 
it,  as  we  have  already  seen  was  the  case  with  Ba'u-kln 
(§  102).  When  "Simmer  and  Akkad"  is  indicated,  it 
also  naturally  means  that  the  kings  in  question  maintained 
jurisdiction  over  some  territory  additional  to  their  own 
proper  realm,  for  the  title  is  never  used  by  itself  alone,  as 
would  certainly  have  been  done  if  the  dominion  of  "  Shumer 
and  Akkad  "  were  an  actual  concrete  monarchy  including 
the  central  kingdom  of  Ur  or  Isin.  What,  then,  is  the 

1  Set  forth  by  Winckler  in  his  essay  "  Sumer  and  Akkad"  (1887),  and 
in  UAG.  p.  65  ff.,  for  the  purpose  of  proving  that  the  kingdom  of  Shumer 
and  Akkad  was  of  purely  southern  origin.  Cf.  also  his  GBA.  p.  44  ff. 

-  That  is  to  say,  unless  we  include  Nippur  (§  94,  101,  104)  in  Southern 
Babylonia,  as  has  usually,  but  erroneously,  been  done.  But  its  position 
brings  it  into  closest  connection  with  Babylon  and  Akkad,  and  the  pre- 
sumption thus  afforded  is  confirmed  by  all  recent  researches.  It  was  only 
after  the  decline  of  the  northern  kingdoms  that  it  was  attached  to  the 
southern,  as  being  the  city  most  accessible  to  the  latter. 


CH.H,  §110  SHINAR   AND   SHUMER  131 

region  embraced  under  Simmer  and  Akkad?  The  answer 
usually  given  is  to  the  effect  that,  while  Akkad  stands  for 
North,  Shumer  stands  for  South  Babylonia.  But  this 
inference  is  now  seen  to  be  wrong,  from  the  simple  con- 
sideration just  stated,  that  the  kings  claiming  this  addi- 
tional title  already  ruled  over  Southern  Babylonia.  The 
mystification  is  aggravated  by  the  circumstance  that  no 
geographical  limitation  of  "Shumer"  has  as  yet  been 
found;  the  word,  in  fact,  never  occurs  alone  in  the  extant 
inscriptions,  but  always  in  connection  with  "Akkad." 
Indeed,  it  might  seem  that  the  double  phrase  was  only 
used  in  a  grandiose  fashion,  like  the  "Holy  Roman 
Empire  "  of  later  days,  to  give  dignity  to  territorial  claims 
rather  than  to  define  their  extent.  Yet  there"  was  doubt- 
less a  time  when  Shumer  answered  to  a  definite  territory, 
and  probably  also  a  later  time  when  "  Shumer  and  Akkad  " 
formed  an  actual  monarchy.  A  conjecture  may  here  be 
hazarded.  We  are  as  yet  without  information  as  to  the 
condition  of  North  Babylonia  while  it  was  still  the  seat  of 
an  independent  monarchy,  between  the  time  of  Sargon  I 
and  his  successors,  arid  the  political  rise  of  the  southern 
states.  This  may  very  well  have  been  the  date  of  the 
kingdom  of  "  Shumer  and  Akkad. "  Shumer  was,  of  course, 
territorially  attached  to  Akkad,  else  the  combination  is 
meaningless.  It  was  naturally  also  nearer  the  southern 
kingdoms  than  was  Akkad,  else  it  would  not  have  been 
mentioned  regularly  before  it.  It  lay  accordingly  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Babylon.  As  to  its  limits  we  can  again 
only  conjecture.  It  is  very  significant,  however,  that  when 
Tiglathpileser  III  made  his  first  Babylonian  expedition, 
it  ranged  from  Sippar  to  Nippur,  and  that  thereupon  he 
assumed  the  title  "king  of  Shumer  and  Akkad"  (§  293), l 
just  as  "  Arioch  "  claimed  the  same  dignity  when  his  juris- 
diction ranged  as  far  north  as  Nippur  (§  108).  Many 

1  Cf .  Winckler,  UAG.  p.  70,  note  2.  Winckler  finds  it  remarkable  that 
Tiglathpileser  should  earn  the  title  by  going  no  further  than  Nippur ;  and 
so  it  would  be  if  Shumer  were  situated  in  Southern  Babylonia. 


132  SHINAH  AND   BABYLON  BOOK  II 

facts  indicate  the  enormous  antiquity  of  Nippur,  and  it 
would  not  be  surprising  if  it  should  turn  out  to  have  been 
the  capital  of  the  kingdom  of  "Shumer,"  which  was  so 
ancient  that  it  was  in  historic  times  little  more  than  the 
shadow  of  a  name. 

§  111.  Reverting  now  to  Shinar,  the  presumptive  equiv- 
alent of  Shumer,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  Biblical  writer 
does  use  this  word  with  a  distinct  geographical  accepta- 
tion. And  here  it  seems  to  answer  pretty  much  to  what 
we  have  just  conjectured  to  have  been  the  location  of 
Shumer.  From  Gen.  xi.,  where  the  city  of  Babylon  is 
mentioned  as  having  been  built  "  in  a  plain  in  the  land  of 
Shinar,"  one  would  naturally  infer  that  the  country  in 
question  lay  in  the  ancient  centre  of  Babylonia.  From 
the  account  before  us  in  Gen.  xiv.,  it  is  apparently  dis- 
tinguished from  another  kingdom,  also  situated  in  Baby- 
lonia,—  at  least  if  we  are  justified  in  making  Larsa  and 
Elasar  one  and  the  same  name.  And  as  Larsa  was,  in  the 
Elamitic  times,  the  centre  of  a  monarchy  including  within 
its  proper  limits  the  more  southerly  portion  of  the  country, 
we  naturally  think  of  Shinar  as  embracing  the  territory 
round  about  Babylon.  At  any  rate,  it  is  clear  that  it  is 
the  same  sense  intended  by  the  writer  in  Gen.  xiv.1  The 
upshot  of  our  inquiry,  accordingly,  is  that  the  ally  of  the 
Elamites  known  as  "Amraphel,  king  of  Shinar,"  had  his 
residence,  roughly  speaking,  somewhere  near  the  ancient 
site  of  Babylon,  and  that  his  dominion  stretched  as  far 
south  as  Nippur. 

§  112.  The  earliest  history  of  Babylon,  the  greatest 
city  ever  founded  by  the  Semites,  the  largest  and  most 
opulent  city  ever  planted  in  Western  Asia,  is  lost  in  the 
obscurity  which  still  involves  the  beginnings  of  the  other 

1  Gen.  x.  10  may,  perhaps,  include  a  wider  reference.  Yet  it  may  also 
be  that  the  concluding  words  of  the  verse  do  not  apply  at  all  to  the  cities 
Babylon,  Akkad,  and  Erech,  but  to  "  Calneh,"  to  distinguish  that  city  from 
the  "  Calneh,"  or  rather  Kullanu  (§  305),  in  Northern  Syria,  mentioned  in 
Amos  vi.  2  ("  Calno,"  in  Isa.  x.  9).  The  site  of  the  Babylonian  "  Calneh  " 
is  not  yet  known.  For  the  supposed  equivalent  Kulunu,  see  Par.  225. 


CH.  II,  §  112  THE   CITY   OF   BABYLON  133 

famous  ancient  communities  whose  fortunes  we  have  been 
considering.  The  name  is  correctly  given  in  the  Old 
Testament  as  Babel.  This  word  is  explained  by  the  sacred 
writer  in  Gen.  xi.  to  mean  "confusion  ";  and  in  the  ideo- 
graphic system  of  its  own  people  it  is  symbolized  by  two 
signs,  which  mean  "the  gate  or  city  of  a  god"  (Bdb-ili'), 
that  is,  "divine  city."  Most  recent  scholars  are  disposed 
to  accept  without  question  the  correctness  of  the  latter 
derivation,  but  it  may  possibly  be  only  a  convenient 
fashion  of  writing  the  name,  and  may  rest  on  a  popular 
but  erroneous  etymology.1  Other  designations  of  Babylon 
found  in  the  native  literature  distinguish  this  city  as 
unique  in  its  beauty  and  glory.  The  appellation  most 
suggestive  to  Bible  readers  is  the  one  which  signalizes  it 
as  the  "Grove  (plantation,  Paradise)  of  Life,"  and  recalls 
to  us  not  only  the  unparalleled  productiveness  of  the 
surrounding  region,  but  its  situation  in  the  centre  of  the 
district  of  Eden,  where  was  the  garden  planted  by  God,  in 
the  midst  of  which  was  the  tree  of  life.2  The  patron 
deity  of  Babylon  was  Maruduk  (Marduk,  "Merodach"). 
He  was  the  son  of  Ea,  the  kindly  god,  the  friend  of  men, 
the  guardian  of  Eridu  (§  101),  and  was  the  bearer  of  his 
father's  healing  and  comforting  gifts  to  his  suffering 
worshippers.3  His  temple  in  Babylon  was  the  august 
Blt-elu  ("the  lofty  house").  The  relationship  to  the 
South  Babylonian  deity  may  imply  that  the  city  was 
founded  by  a  colony  from  near  "the  mouth  of  the  Rivet's," 
and  it  is  significant  that  Merodach  was  a  chief  divinity  of 
the  Chaldieans  also,  —  a  fact  which  may  partly  explain  the 
persistent  and  at  last  successful  attempts  of  these  dwellers 
by  the  sea  to  get  possession  of  Babylon  in  later  times.4 

1  Are  not  divine  names  used  in  such  cases  invariably  those  of  individual 
deities,  and  not  general  terms  ? 

2  Cf.  Par.  60  ;  212.  3  IV  R.  7  col.  I,  17  ff. 

4  According  to  the  Omen-tablets  (§  90)  Babylon  was  in  existence  in 
the  time  of  Sargon.  Hilprecht  (OBT.  I,  p.  25  f.)  thinks  plausibly  that 
the  somewhat  defaced  inscription  relates  that  Sargon  destroyed  the 
Babylon  of  those  days. 


134  BORSIPPA   AND   THE   TOWER    OF   BABEL       BOOK  II 

The  familiar  identification  of  Bel  with  Babylon  is  to  be 
explained  by  the  success  which  attended  the  efforts  of  the 
people  of  Babel  to  secure  and  maintain  the  hegemony  of 
the  whole  Semitic  realm,  of  which  Bel  was  the  traditional 
ethnic  deity.  It  is  unnecessary  to  remark  that  this  special 
appreciation  of  Bel  in  Babylon  did  not  prejudice  the  claim 
of  Bel's  own  city,  Nippur  (§  94),  to  be  recognized  per- 
petually as  the  seat  of  his  proper  worship.  Indeed,  the 
assumption  of  the  august  Bel-cultus  was  understood  to 
bring  with  it  the  obligation  and  privilege  of  protecting 
Nippur,  which  we  may  suppose  to  have  been  one  of  the 
first  of  the  more  southerly  cities  to  acknowledge  the  head- 
ship of  Babylon. —  Very  close  to  Babylon,  on  the  south, 
lay  the  city  of  Borsippa  (2?amjp),  which,  in  the  days  of 
the  Chaldtean  empire,  came  to  be  united  with  it  in  the 
same  system  of  fortifications.  Borsippa  was  famous  chiefiy 
for  its  magnificent  temples.  It  was  the  special  seat  of  the 
worship  of  the  great  god  Nebo  (Nabu),  the  prophet  god, 
the  patron  of  learning  and  science,  the  revealer  of  the  will 
of  the  gods,  the  Babylonian  Mercury,  after  whom  the  fourth 
day  of  the  week  (Mercurii  dies,  Mercredi)  was  named. 
That  Nebo  was  reckoned  the  son  of  Merodach,  the  Baby- 
lonian Jupiter,  to  whom  the  fifth  day  (Jovis  dies,  Jeudi) 
was  sacred,  must  be  connected  in  some  way  with  the  rela- 
tions of  Borsippa  to  Babylon.  A  standing  recognition  of 
this  association  was  afforded  in  the  impressive  ceremony l 
enacted  at  the  beginning  of  every  year,  the  first  of  Nisan, 
in  which  Nebo  left  his  temple  in  Borsippa  and  proceeded 
to  the  temple  of  Merodach  in  Babylon,  where,  being  joined 
by  the  latter  divinity,  the  solemn  procession  was  resumed. 
Among  the  famous  temples  of  Borsippa  was  one  desig- 
nated, "House  of  the  seven  spheres  of  heaven  and  earth," 
a  structure  often  rebuilt  but  never  completed,  whose  vast 
ruins  are  held  by  most  authorities  to  represent  the  "  Tower 
of  Babel"  of  Gen.  xi.2 

1  Cf.  Winckler,  GBA.  p.  35  f. 

2  See  Par.   p.  217  ;   against  this  view  Hominel,   GBA.  p.   232,    and 


CH.  II,  §114  THE    "KING   OF   SHINAR"  135 

§  113.  Since  now  the  kingdom  of  "  Amraphel,  king  of 
Shinar  "  is  to  be  sought  in  North  Babylonia,  and  probably 
embraced  the  city  of  Babylon  (§  111),  it  should  be  possible 
to  identify  his  name  with  that  of  one  of  the  contemporary 
rulers  of  that  city,  if  these  can  be  discovered.  They  have, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  been  brought  to  light.  Lists  of  all  the 
kings  of  Babylon,  with  the  length  of  their  reigns  and  the 
names  and  duration  of  the  dynasties,  have  been  preserved 
in  a  fairly  usable  condition ; 1  and  with  the  help  of  chrono- 
logical notices  and  references  to  early  events  in  the  later 
literature,  it  is  possible  to  arrive  at  almost  the  exact  date 
of  each  of  the  ancient  rulers  in  question.  We  are  thus 
furnished  with  the  dates  2403-2098  B.C.,  as  the  closely 
approximate  limits  of  the  duration  of  the  first  dynasty. 
Now  we  have  already  seen  that  the  Elamitic  invasion  of 
Erech  took  place  about  2285  (§  107),  and  a  synchronism 
of  the  most  satisfactory  character  is  secured  by  a  statement 
appended  to  a  contract-tablet  of  Hammurabi,  one  of  the 
kings  of  this  dynasty,2  found  near  Larsa,  the  Elamitic 
capital,  and  dated  in  the  year  when  he  gained  a  victory 
over  the  lord  of  Yamutbal  (West  Elam),  and  over  King 
Arioch.  Now  this  famous  ruler  appeal's  from  the  list  of 
kings  just  spoken  of  to  have  reigned  c.  2264-2210. 

§  114.  Is  "  Amraphel,  king  of  Shinar  "  likely  to  have 
been  Chammurabi  himself?  This  is  not  antecedently 
probable,  since  the  circumstantial  statement  of  Gen.  xiv., 

Rawlinson,  FM.  II,  534  f.  For  a  description  of  the  ruins  (Birs-Nimrud) 
with  illustrations,  see  FM.  II,  544  ff. ;  for  Babylon  and  its  environs  FM. 
II,  510  ff. ;  Kaulen,  Assyrien  und  Babylonien,  ch.  v. 

1  The  texts  are  published  in  PSBA.  1884,  p.  193  ff.,  and  1888,  p.  22  ; 
more  fully  in  Winckler,  UAG.  p.  145-147.  The  first  fragments  were 
given  to  the  world  by  G.  Smith  in  1874.  The  subject  of  Babylonian  and 
Assyrian  chronology  is,  as  a  whole,  best  discussed  by  Winckler  in  the 
work  just  cited  (p.  1-46);  cf.  also  Hommel,  GBA.  100  ff. ;  Tiele,  BAG.  02  ff. 
Winckler  is  skeptical  about  the  remote  date  assigned  by  Nabonidus  to 
Naram-Sin,  but  without  good  reason  (cf.  §  88). 

-  IV  R.1  36,  Nr.  21.  Some  expressions  in  the  inscription,  which  is 
written  ideographically,  are  of  uncertain  reading  and  meaning.  The 
general  sense  must  be  as  given  above.  Conip.  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  126-127. 


136  BIBLICAL   IDENTIFICATIONS  BOOK  II 

which  is  evidently  based  on  documentary  evidence,  makes 
the  "king  of  Shinar"  to  have  been  an  ally  of  the  "king 
of  Elam  "  twelve  years,  and  it  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that 
a  prince  of  the  character  and  vast  designs  of  Chammurabi 
(§  117)  would  have  remained  long  a  vassal  of  the  Elamites. 
The  Babylonian  king  concerned  is  much  more  likely  to 
have  been  the  father  of  Chammurabi,  and  attempts  have 
even  been  made  to  show  a  possible  identity  of  their  names. 
The  ruler  in  question  is  called  in  the  dynastic  list  /Sin- 
muballit  ("Sin  keeps  alive").  Now  there  is  some  evi- 
dence l  that  one  of  the  epithets  of  Sin  was  Amar,  and  if 
this  is  so,  and  if  the  epithet  Amar  was  really  used  for  Sin 
in  the  community  whence  the  original  of  the  Hebrew 
record  was  derived,  it  may  be  regarded  as  possible,  after 
the  analogy  of  other  constructions,  that  the  Hebrew  form 
Amarpal  was  a  corruption  of  Amar-muballit.  The  coinci- 
dence is  at  least  striking,  especially  in  view  of  the  agree- 
ments between  the  records  in  other  respects.  The  whole 
historical  situation  may  be  summarized  as  follows.  About 
2250  B.C.,  Kudur-Lagamar  (Chedorlaomer)  was  king  of 
Elam,  or  more  probably  of  the  western  portion  of  it,  called 
in  the  inscriptions  Yamutbal.  He  was  presumably  the 
successor  and  son  of  Kudur-Mabug,  and,  like  him,  main- 
tained his  sway  over  Babylonia,  with  Arioch  as  his  vice- 
roy in  Larsa,  having  also  the  kingdom  of  "  Shinar "  as 
a  vassal  state.2  This  Elamitic  occupation  of  Babylonia, 
North  and  South,  did  not  last  very  long,  and  the  con- 
querors apparently  did  not  succeed  in  colonizing  the 
country  with  people  of  their  own  nationality ;  at  any  rate, 
as  we  shall  see,  the  patriotic  spirit  of  the  Babylonians  was 
not  quenched  by  their  oppressions.  One  of  the  means 

1  IV  R.  9,  19  f.    Sin,  in  this  passage,  as  the  horned  moon,  is  addressed 
as  a  young  bull,  the  ideogram  for  which  has  for  one  of  its  readings  amar. 
Cf .  the  name  of  one  of  the  kings  of  the  second  dynasty  of  Ur,  which  may 
be  read  either  Bur-Sin  or  Amar-Sin.     See  Hommel,  GBA.  213  n. 

2  This  would  account  for  the  fact  that  the  kings  of  Larsa  could  call 
themselves  "king  of  Shumer  and  Akkad"  (§  110  f.). 


CH.  II,  §115  REVIEW  OF   CONCLUSIONS  137 

employed  by  Kudur-Lagamar  to  aggrandize  his  suzerainty, 
as  well  as  to  consolidate  his  power,  was  to  carry  out  the 
traditional  policy  of  the  leading  Babylonian  states,  of 
spoiling  and  tolling  the  West-land  with  its  precious 
woods  and  spices  and  minerals.  So  valuable  to  him  was 
the  occupation  of  Palestine  that  a  revolt  of  the  leading 
communities  there  brought  upon  them  the  whole  force  of 
the  Elamitic  army,  together  with  the  vassals  and  allies 
from  far  and  near.  The  issue  of  this  attempt  was  at  first 
successful,  and  it  seemed  likely  that  the  subjection  of 
Palestine  might  be  continued  much  longer,  but  the  sur- 
prise and  defeat  of  the  victorious  Easterners,  upon  their 
return  march,  put  an  end  to  Elamitic  influence  in  the 
West.  Not  many  years  afterwards  the  Elamites  were 
expelled  from  Babylonia  itself,  and  the  new  native  regime 
was  maintained  by  a  ruler  who  found  his  account  in  con- 
centrating and  developing  the  resources  of  the  home  land, 
instead  of  encouraging  adventures  in  the  Eldorado  of  the 
West.  Further  particulars  of  the  regime  of  the  foreigners 
we  are  not  able  to  give  (cf.  §  107  f.). 

§  115.  Before  passing  to  the  new  era  which  was  ushered 
in  by  the  assured  predominance  of  Babel,  it  will  be  well 
to  cast  a  backward  glance  over  the  ground  which  has  been 
thus  far  traversed  and  to  note  one  or  two  outstanding  con- 
clusions. One  thing  that  particularly  strikes  the  attention 
and  impresses  the  imagination  is  the  enormous  antiquity 
of  the  Semitic  race.  Here  we  have  as  our  firm  standing- 
ground  the  Semitic  culture  of  Babylonia;  and  this  we 
must  recognize  as  a  product  of  complex,  slowly  working 
forces.  In  4000  B.C.,  we  find  spoken  there  a  language 
differing  in  no  essential  respect  from  that  used  3500  years 
later,  grammatical  forms  already  stereotyped,  and  so  char- 
acteristically developed  by  a  long  process  of  phonetic 
change  as  to  be  altogether  beyond  the  range  of  direct 
comparison  with  the  old  Proto-Semitic  types  from  which 
they  sprang.  The  obvious  inference  is  that  this  original 
Semitic  speech  must  have  antedated  the  historic  Baby- 


138  RELATIONS   WITH   THE    WEST  BOOK  II 

Ionian  idiom  by  an  unknown  period  filled  with  a  busy 
social  and  corporate  life,  whose  only  record  and  memorial 
are  the  transmuted  words  and  sentences  of  the  language 
which  was  its  instrument  and  expression.  Farther,  the 
old  common  Semitic  speech  can  be  proved  by  the  vocables 
found  in  all  the  great  branches  of  the  family  to  have  been 
the  idiom  of  a  people  already  well  furnished  with  the 
rudimentary  appliances  of  civilization.  The  attempt  to 
sound  the  depths  of  this  vast  and  eventful  Semitic  antiquity 
must  call  to  its  aid,  not  sober  historic  induction  and  calcu- 
lation, but  the  imagination  trained  in  the  freer  and  less 
exacting  school  of  prehistoric  archseology. 

§  116.  We  have  already  been  able  to  obtain  glimpses, 
as  through  rifted  clouds,  of  the  manifold  life  and  activity 
of  ancient  Babylonia  in  certain  great  epochs  in  very  remote 
periods  of  human  history  (§  90  f.,  97).  One  of  the  most 
surprising  revelations  thus  afforded  is  the  far  westward 
extension  of  Babylonian  enterprise  and  influence.  We 
found  reason  to  assume  that  for  a  considerable  period  there 
was  a  suspension  of  these  relations  between  the  East  and 
the  West  (§  103),  and  it  is  not  impossible  that  the  most 
fruitful  time  of  the  Babylonian  occupation  of  Syria,  Pales- 
tine, and  Western  Arabia,  until  the  days  of  the  latest  or 
Chaldsean  empire,  was  that  which  we  are  accustomed  to 
denote  as  the  dawn  of  history,  —  a  time  which  has  been 
itself  pushed  immensely  farther  back  by  the  results  of 
modern  research.  Yet  the  casual  information  of  Gen.  xiv. 
reveals  a  continuance  of  the  ancient  policy  of  interference 
in  the  West,  indicated  as  though  it  were  almost  a  matter 
of  course.  It  is  evident  that  we  have  here  a  phenomenon 
much  more  important  than  a  mere  fortuitous  succession  of 
actions ;  we  have  to  reckon  with  it  as  a  chief  element  in 
the  whole  historical  drama  of  Western  Asia.  As  its 
results  were  most  momentous  in  the  history  of  civilization 
and  religion,  so  we  have  seen  its  earliest  traceable  move- 
ments to  have  been  portentously  large  and  comprehensive. 
We  are  accordingly  justified  anew  in  attaching  to  it  a 


CH.  II,  §  116     UNCHANGING   BABYLONIAN   POLICY  139 

constant  importance,  commensurate  with  its  duration  and 
the  catastrophe  with  which  it  finally  closed.  The  fact  that 
the  ruling  power  of  the  East  always  claimed  the  West-land 
for  itself,  will  become  continually  more  manifest  as  our 
history  unfolds  itself;  but  what  is  specially  significant, 
even  from  the  present  partial  and  defective  retrospect,  is 
the  priority  of  Babylonia  in  the  assertion  of  such  a  claim, 
and  its  unforgetting  watchfulness  for  chances  to  make  it 
good.  And  so  in  after  times,  when  the  Assyrian  heirs  of 
the  old  Babylonian  idea  had  realized  the  ancient  dream  for 
themselves  and  then  collapsed  in  the  ruins  of  their  own 
greatness,  the  Chaldseans  of  Babylonia,  whom  we  are  apt 
to  think  of  as  merely  imitators  of  the  Ninevites  in  their 
Western  conquests,  did  in  reality  not  simply  take  up  a 
policy  devised  by  their  predecessors ;  they  rather  revived 
an  imperial  plan  of  action  which  had  never  really  been 
relinquished  by  the  kingdoms  of  the  Euphrates.  This 
conception  of  the  unchanging  perpetual  relations  of  the 
East  and  the  West  throws  a  new  light  upon  the  whole 
history  of  the  ancient  Semites  in  Hither  Asia.  It  explains 
in  the  most  satisfactory  way  how  it  is  that  in  the  literature 
of  the  Hebrews  the  leading  place  is  given  to  the  Babylo- 
nians and  not  to  the  Assyrians,  though  the  former  in  Bibli- 
cal times  had  a  supremacy  of  only  seventy  years'  duration. 
But  what  we  chiefly  gain  from  it  is  a  broader  view  and 
surer  grasp  of  the  long  chain  of  causes  that  brought  about 
the  subjection  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  the  abasement  of 
Israel,  its  servitude,  its  Babylonian  education,  its  purifica- 
tion and  deliverance  (cf.  §  93}. 


CHAPTER  III 

UNITED   BABYLONIA 

§  117.  CHAMMURABI,  who  has  been  already  referred  to 
as  the  liberator  of  Babylon  and  of  the  whole  of  Babylonia 
from  the  Elamitic  yoke,  was  the  sixth  of  his  dynasty.1  An 
indication  has  already  been  given  of  the  approximate  date 
of  the  overthrow  and  expulsion  of  the  Elamitic  oppressors, 
which  we  may  tentatively  place  at  about  2240  B.C.  Of  the 
details  of  the  ejection  of  the  foreigners  we  know  nothing. 
It  must  have  involved  not  only  the  freeing  of  Babel, 
Nippur,  and  other  northern  centres,  but  successful  attacks 
upon  the  Elamitic  garrisons  in  Larsa,  Ur,  and  the  rest  of 
their  strongholds  in  the  South.  But  even  if  we  were 
acquainted  with  all  the  particulars  of  the  battles  and 
sieges  which  were  the  occasions  of  his  military  triumphs, 
they  would  add  little  to  the  renown  of  one  whom  we  must 
recognize  on  higher  grounds  as  being  the  most  important 
historic  figure  in  ancient  Babylonia.  He  not  only  restored 
Semitic  supremacy,  but  maintained  it;  not  only  emanci- 
pated Babylonia  from  alien  laws  and  manners,  but  made  it 
a  nation.  Before  him  there  was  no  real  Babylonia,  because 
the  Babylon  to  whose  government  he  succeeded  was  a  minor 
principality.  After  him,  there  never  ceased,  till  the  close 
of  ancient  Semitism,  to  be  a  Babylonia,  in  fact  if  not  in 
name,  because  he  made  his  capital  the  centre  of  the  East. 
In  accomplishing  these  great  ends  his  policy  was  as  far- 
seeing  as  it  was  beneficent.  He  took  advantage  of  the 

1  For  his  inscriptions,  which  are  numerous  and  valuable,  see  especially 
Mfinant,  Inscriptions  de  Ifammoiirabi,  1863 ;  and  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  106  ff.  ; 
cf.  §  113. 

140 


CH.  Ill,  §  118      CIIAMMURABI  AND   HIS   DYNASTY  141 

situation  of  Babylon  to  endow  it  with  majestic  works, 
which  tended  to  centralize  there  commerce,  manufactures, 
science,  and  religious  worship.  Chief  among  the  under- 
takings by  which  he  aimed  to  secure  perpetually  the 
hegemony  of  Babylon,  were  palaces  and  temples  and  canals. 
To  foster  the  worship  of  the  national  deities,  Merodach  and 
Nebo,  he  erected  two  famous  temples :  Bit-elu  ("  the  lofty 
house")  in  Babylon  itself,  to  the  former;  and  Bit-kenu 
("the  enduring  house")  in  the  sister  city,  or  suburb,  of 
Borsippa,  to  the  latter1  (cf.  §  112).  Perhaps  the  work  in 
which  he  took  the  greatest  pride,  and  which  best  indicates 
his  perception  of  the  true  basis  of  the  national  prosperity, 
was  a  great  canal,  which  he  called  "Chammurabi's  canal, 
the  enricher  of  the  people,"  and  for  which  he  claims  that 
it  increased  greatly,  through  improved  irrigation  and  re- 
claimed arable  land,  the  wealth  and  comfort  of  his  people, 
under  the  blessing  of  Merodach.  This  achievement  is 
commemorated  in  a  special  inscription.  A  similar  dignity 
and  immortality  is  conferred  upon  another  enterprise  for 
the  public  weal,  — a  fortress  on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris, 
which  seems  to  have  been  erected  at  the  central  point  of  a 
great  embankment,  to  preserve  the  settlements  along  that 
river  from  the  inundations  to  which  they  were  periodically 
exposed. 

§  118.  After  a  reign  of  fifty-five  years,  Chammurabi 
bequeathed  the  crown  of  Babylon  and  the  united  kingdoms 
of  Babylonia  to  his  son  Samsu-iluna  (B.C.  2209-2180). 
This  ruler,  reigning  in  the  spirit  of  his  father,  developed 
still  further  the  national  system  of  canalization,  and  by 
strengthening  his  frontier  against  his  hereditary  foes  across 

1  These  are  usually  read,  according  to  the  "hieratic"  values  of  the 
ideograms  used  in  ilio  writing  of  the  names :  Esftyila  and  Ezida  (the  pre- 
fix e  in  each  case  meaning  "house").  As  to  sagila,  it  is  manifestly  a 
combination  of  the  pure  Semitic  words,  saku  and  clu,  both  meaning 
"  high."  The  second  temple  is  called  Kit-keim  in  VR.  06,  II,  7,  as  the 
explanation  of  Ezlda.  For  other  temples  of  the  same  name,  see  ZK.  II, 
260.  Among  temples  restored  by  this  monarch  was  the  renowned  "  House 
of  the  Sun"  at  Sippar  (§  87,  94). 


142  LONG   PEACE   IN   BABYLONIA  BOOK  II 

the  Tigris,  secured  the  peace  as  well  as  the  continued 
prosperity  of  his  subjects.1  Of  the  remaining  reigns  of 
this  dynasty  but  scanty  notices  remain;  but  the  unbroken 
transmission  of  the  regal  authority  from  father  to  son,  with 
an  average  of  lengthy  reigns,  indicates  that  the  times  were 
peaceful  and,  we  may  assume,  fairly  prosperous.  Five 
kings  after  Chammurabi,  till  2098  B.C.,  complete  the  list 
of  the  eleven  kings  of  this  first  dynasty,  who  reigned  in 
all  304  years. 

§  119.  The  epoch  made  memorable  by  the  deeds  and 
enterprise  of  Chammurabi  is  followed  by  a  period  of  368 
years,  of  the  occurrences  of  which  absolutely  nothing  is 
known,  except  the  names  and  regnal  years  of  another  list 
(cf .  §  113)  of  eleven  kings  reigning  in  the  city  of  Babylon. 
In  assuming  the  duration  of  this  dynasty,  and  even  its 
existence,  our  faith  in  the  trustworthiness  of  the  isolated 
record  is  put  to  a  severe  test,  especially  when  the  length  of 
reign  assigned  to  several  of  the  kings  is  considered.  For 
example,  the  first-named  ruler  is  credited  with  sixty  years 
of  sovereignty,  the  second  and  sixth  with  fifty-five,  and  the 
seventh  with  fifty.  We  are  bound,  however,  to  give  cre- 
dence to  these  carefully  compiled  reports,  and  it  is  an 
exceptionally  pleasant  reflection  which  we  can  make  upon 
the  dynasty  as  a  whole,  that  the  times  must  have  been 
very  peaceful  when  such  security  of  administration  wras 
possible.  But  we  find  that  the  two  reigns  at  the  close 
lasted  but  six  and  nine  years  respectively,  and  this  is 
perhaps  evidence  that  the  long  tranquillity  was  disturbed 
by  the  foreign  invaders  whose  predominance  marks  the 
following  period. 

§  120.  The  foreign  non-Semitic  race,  which  for  nearly 
six  centuries  (c.  1730-1153),  from  this  time  onward,  held  a 
controlling  place  in  the  affairs  of  Babylonia,  are  referred 

1  For  the  main  inscription,  see  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  130-133,  and  ZA.III,  153. 
Contract  tablets  of  his  reign  IV  R.i  36,  Nr.  45  ff.  Hommel  (GBA.  p.  408) 
points  out  that  these  tablets  show  how  real  estate  rose  in  value  during 
these  reigns. 


CH.  Ill,  §  120  THE   KASSHITES  143 

to  in  the  inscriptions  by  the  name  Kasse.  These  Kasshites 
came  from  the  border  country  between  Northern  Elam  and 
Media,  and  were  in  all  probability  of  the  same  race  as  the 
Elamites.  The  references  to  them  make  them  out  to  be 
both  mountaineers  and  tent-dwellers, —  a  circumstance 
which  agrees  very  well  with  the  indications  that  their 
name  is  identical  with  the  Kiacrioi  of  the  Greek  historians 
and  geographers,1  who  inhabited  Susiana,  or  Northern 
Elam.  Apparently,  then,  they  occupied  both  the  slopes  of 
Mount  Zagros  and  the  valleys  and  plains  to  the  south,  the 
former  being  the  source  of  supply,  and  the  latter  the  resort 
of  predatory  bands  and  adventurous  emigrants,  such  as  in 
the  ancient  East  were  continually  descending  from  the 
rugged  mountain  chains  to  the  more  tractable  soil  and  the 
easier  conditions  of  living  to  be  found  in  the  lowlands. 
A  special  interest  attaches  to  the  Kasshites,  from  the 
circumstance  that  their  name  appears  to  be  the  same  as 
Kos,  the  regular  phonetic  equivalent  in  Hebrew  of  the 
Babylonian  Kds.  Accordingly,  the  "  Gush  "  of  our  mod- 
ern Bible  translations  (Gen.  ii.  13)  should  be  read  "  Kosh," 
and  sharply  distinguished  from  "  Gush "  or  Ethiopia. 
Among  the  many  tribes  which  occupied  the  territory 
adjacent  to  the  Rivers,  the  Kasshites  exercised  the  strong- 
est and  most  enduring  political  influence  on  the  affairs  of 
Babylonia,  and,  with  the  possible  exception  of  the  Ara- 
maeans, contributed  most  largely  to  swell  its  population 
and  to  modify  the  race  characteristics  of  its  inhabitants. 
Assuming  the  kinship,  or,  in  the  larger  sense,  the  identity, 
of  this  people  with  the  Elamites,  we  see  what  an  immense 
tract  of  time  was  covered  by  the  domination  of  Babylonia 

1  Delitz.sch,  Par.  129;  Oppert  in  ZA.  Ill,  421  ff.  V,  100  f.,  and  Jensen 
in  ZA.  VII,  ;>28  ff.  In  spite  of  the  assertions  of  the  last  two  writers  it  is 
not  certain,  as  yet,  that  the  Kocro-aioi  of  a  later  date  are  to  be  associated 
with  the  Kasse  and  the  KiWioi  only  by  similarity  of  sound  in  the 
names,  especially  when  they  inhabited  the  region  occupied  by  the  Kas.se 
of  the  inscriptions.  Historical  and  linguistic  "  Funde  und  Fragen  "  as 
to  the  Kasshites  are  to  be  found  in  the  work  of  Delitzsch,  Die  Kossiier, 
1884. 


144  NATURE   OF   THE   KASSHITE  CONQUEST         BOOK  II 

by  these  immigrants  from  the  east  and  northeast;  and 
also  what  an  enormous  antiquity  and  vitality  must  be 
assigned  to  the  ancient  Babylonian  civilization,  when  we 
behold  it  for  so  many  hundreds  of  years  entertaining  these 
half-barbarous  strangers,  and  assimilating  them  to  its  own 
spirit  and  complexion  (§  121).  These  Kasshites,  like 
their  presumptive  kindred,  were  imbued  with  an  eager 
ambition  to  secure  a  permanent  footing  in  Babylonia;  but 
we  do  not  need  to  assume  that  they  were  acting  in  any  way 
in  concert  with  the  older  Elamites,  or  that  they  desired  to 
reassert  the  predominance  once  held  by  the  latter.  The 
fact  is  that  the  rich  and  highly  cultivated  soil  of  the  inter- 
fluvial  region  proved  a  standing  temptation  to  the  dwellers 
in  the  less  favoured  and  less  civilized  neighbour  lands, 
whatever  might  be  their  racial  or  national  associations. 
Conquest  by  wholesale  invasion  was  out  of  the  question 
after  the  unification  and  consolidation  of  the  country,  and 
the  only  method  by  which  an  outside  people  could  obtain 
a  footing  was  by  gradual  encroachment  and  appropriation 
of  territory.  These  fierce  mountaineers,  uncivilized  and 
unorganized  into  a  nation,  must,  therefore,  have  secured 
possession  of  a  country  so  totally  dissimilar  to  their  own 
by  slow  degrees  and  after  a  long  succession  of  border  raids 
and  forcible  settlements  in  favourable  localities.  A  strong 
and  united  government,  such  as  that  of  Chammurabi  and 
his  immediate  successors,  would  have  prevented  these 
expeditions  from  rising  beyond  the  precarious  dignity  and 
importance  of  marauding  incursions ;  and  the  fact  that  the 
Kasshite  conquest  was  effected  at  all,  can  only  be  explained 
on  the  supposition  that  the  country  was  disorganized  and 
the  central  power  no  longer  able  to  keep  in  hand  the 
provinces,  which  had  only  been  drawn  out  of  their  isola- 
tion by  the  genius  of  the  great  founder  of  Babylonian 
nationality. 

§  121.  In  this  Kasshite  occupation,  we  see  presented  in 
a  more  striking  form  the  same  phenomenon  which  was 
already  exhibited  in  the  Elamitic  domination  (§  106  ff.). 


CH.  Ill,  §  121      RELATIONS   OF   THE   TWO   PEOPLES  145 

The  political  sway  of  the  foreign  masters  was  undisputed, 
but  the  genius  of  the  government  and  the  national  type  of 
culture  and  forms  of  activity  were  essentially  unchanged. 
We  find  the  names  of  the  kings  for  hundreds  of  years 
prevailingly  foreign,  and  even  geographical  designations, 
such  as  that  for  Babylonia  itself  ("  Kardunias  "),  as  shown 
by  their  structure,  and  particularly  by  their  endings,  came 
to  be  of  Kasshite  make.  Even  Kasshite  deities  were 
introduced  and  popularly  acknowledged,  though  not  to  the 
exclusion  of  the  native  divinities, —  a  fact  which  of  itself 
sufficiently  proves  that  no  sudden  violent  subjugation  of 
the  country  on  a  large  scale  was  undertaken  by  the  moun- 
taineers. The  Kasshite  kings,  and  the  immigrants  who 
came  with  them,  and  who  doubtless  grew  to  be  a  large 
element  among  the  ruling  classes,  were  thoroughly  Baby- 
lonianized.  Hence  we  are  prepared  to  find  the  old  policy 
of  political  and  commercial  extension  westward  sedulously 
pursued,  and  the  development  of  the  internal  resources  of 
the  country  steadily  maintained.  Such  a  phenomenon  is 
quite  unmatched  in  modern  history.  For  its  parallels  we 
must  look  to  the  ancient  world,  where  we  sometimes  find 
a  community  of  the  highest  culture  lying  close  beside  a 
people  wholly  untutored,  but  vigorous  and  aggressive,  and 
eager  to  appropriate  the  fruits  of  a  civilization  which  they 
could  only  vaguely  understand.  So  absolute  was  the  con- 
trast between  the  Kasshites  and  the  Babylonians,  in 
political  as  well  as  general  cultural  development,  that  the 
former,  while  able  to  hold  their  new  possessions  by  virtue 
of  their  unspoiled  natural  virility  and  energy,  could  only 
utilize  the  manifold  resources  of  the  co*untry  by  adapting 
themselves  to  the  requirements  of  its  varied  civilization. 
While  an  amalgamation  of  races  was  perpetually  going  on 
in  Babylonia,  no  mixture  or  compromise  was  possible  in 
manners  or  ruling  ideas  or  conceptions  of  life.  Through 
century  after  century,  and  millennium  after  millennium, 
the  dominant  genius  of  Babylonia  remained  the  same.  It 
conquered  all  its  conquerors,  and  moulded  them  to  its  own 


146  VITALITY   OF  BABYLONIAN   CULTURE          BOOK  II 

likeness  by  the  force  of  its  manifold  culture,  by  the 
appliances  as  well  as  the  prestige  of  the  arts  of  peace.  Its 
military  strongholds  had  to  be  surrendered  one  after  the 
other ;  but  its  intellectual  vantage-ground  raised  it  above 
rivalry,  and  even  above  interference,  in  those  elements  and 
qualities  of  life  and  influence  which  are  the  most  vital 
and  enduring,  because  they  are  the  hardest  to  achieve 
and  therefore  the  slowest  to  be  parted  with. 

§  122.  It  will  be  instructive  to  dwell  a  moment  longer 
on  this  topic,  and  note  the  underlying  causes  of  this  singu- 
lar historical  phenomenon.  The  Babylonians  were  not 
able  to  maintain  perpetually  their  political  autonomy  or 
integrity,  not  because  they  were  not  brave  or  patriotic,  for 
their  history  testifies  both  to  their  courage  and  their 
attachment  to  their  institutions.  They  were,  besides, 
continually  replenished  with  accessions  of  warlike  ele- 
ments, and  there  was  therefore  no  risk  of  their  yielding  to 
the  effeminating  influences  of  their  great  material  pros- 
perity. The  reasons  for  their  subordination  to  outside 
peoples  lie  in  the  conditions  already  suggested.  They 
were  not,  first  and  foremost,  a  military  people.  Their 
energies  were  mainly  spent  in  trade  and  manufacture,  in 
science  and  art.  Devotion  to  intellectual  pursuits  of  itself 
powerfully  conduced  to  a  peaceful  disposition  and  con- 
ciliatory manners;  while  the  accumulation  of  valuable 
property  by  great  numbers  of  private  citizens  engendered 
shyness  of  aggressive  conflicts,  and  tended  to  encourage 
compromise  with  invaders  rather  than  prolonged  resistance. 
In  this  feature  of  Babylonian  national  character,  there  is  a 
striking  resemblance  to  the  disposition  of  the  Phoenician 
cities  (§  42,  44).  Indeed,  it  was  a  condition  of  the  very 
existence  of  a  great  commercial  and  manufacturing  com- 
munity in  the  ancient  East  that  it  should  sacrifice  much 
for  the  sake  of  peace,  as  contrasted  with  those  kingdoms 
which  became  rich  and  powerful  through  the  plunder  of 
conquered  lands.  This  fact  suggests  at  once  a  marked 
distinction  between  the  older  Babylonia  and  her  great 


CH.  Ill,  §  122     TEMPER   AND   TASTES   OF   THE   PEOPLE  147 

colony,  Assyria,  which  became  her  conqueror.  Another 
important  historical  inference  may  be  drawn,  with  relation 
to  the  motives  which  urged  these  two  communities  to 
interfere  in  the  West-land.  What  we  have  seen  already 
of  the  expeditions  into  Syria,  Palestine,  and  Western 
Arabia  which  started  from  Babylonia  under  one  regime 
and  another,  from  the  time  of  Sargon  onward,  goes  to  show 
that  they  were  undertaken,  not  merely  from  religious 
motives  and  lust  of  power,  but  chiefly  with  the  view  of 
getting  control  of  important  industries  or  natural  produc- 
tions. The  history  of  Assyrian  and  Chaldoean  aggression, 
on  the  other  hand,  will  show  us  that  their  love  of  conquest 
and  spoliation  and  absolute  dominion  furnished  the  prin- 
ciple impulse.  But  there  was,  finally,  another  feature  of 
the  Babylonian  character  which  perhaps  operated  most 
strongly  to  divert  the  minds  of  both  rulers  and  people  from 
a  predominating  occupation  with  military  affairs.  The 
people  of  Babylonia  were  first  and  last  and  always  a 
religious  people.  Amongst  them  were  the  chief  seats  of 
the  gods  who  ruled  the  Semitic  world;  here  were  the  most 
ancient  shrines,  the  earliest  and  most  authentic  traditions, 
the  sacred  cities,  the  most  august  ritual,  the  most  magnifi- 
cent temples.  So  portentous  and  sacrosanct  were  these 
prerogatives  that  the  spectacle,  unique  in  Semitic  lands, 
was  here  afforded,  of  the  successive  conquerors  of  the 
country  vying  with  the  native  rulers  in  care  and  rever- 
ence for  the  immemorial  religion  and  rites  of  the  land  and 
the  cities  they  subdued.  In  this  respect,  again,  a  contrast 
with  Assyria  at  once  suggests  itself.  While  the  monarchs 
of  the  latter  country  give  in  their  annals  and  formal 
inscriptions  generally  the  leading  place  to  an  account  of 
their  achievements  in  war,  and  seem  to  attach  a  secondary 
importance  even  to  their  sedulous  care  for  the  consecrated 
abodes  of  the  gods,  the  Babylonian  state  records  from  the 
very  earliest  times  are  devoted  almost  exclusively  to  the 
building  and  renewing  of  temples.  Now,  all  the  work  of 
preserving,  and  multiplying  or  embellishing  the  temples, 


148  CULTURE   OPPOSED   TO   MILITARISM  BOOK  II 

and  providing  for  the  due  performance  of  the  multifarious 
rites  of  the  several  national  cults,  must  have  involved  a 
heavy  drain  on  the  resources  of  the  people,  and  their 
interest  being  correspondingly  enlisted  in  the  whole 
system,  a  place  below  the  highest  must  have  been  assigned 
to  the  affairs  of  the  camp  and  the  field,  vitally  important 
as  these  often  proved  to  be.  In  brief,  the  people  who  gave 
tone  and  character  to  the  several  communities  of  Babylonia, 
and  to  the  country  as  a  whole,  were  not  the  king  and  his 
officers,  civil  and  military;  but,  on  the  one  hand,  the 
priestly  class,  with  their  clerical  force  and  their  staff  of 
assistants,  the  corps  of  astrologers  and  astronomers,  the 
teachers  and  students  of  the  sacred  sciences  and  the  related 
learning,  the  judges,  magistrates,  and  lawyers ; 1  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  great  merchants  and  manufacturers,  the 
engineers  and  architects,  with  their  vast  army  of  employees. 
To  revert  once  more  to  Assyria  by  way  of  contrast,  it  may 
be  pointed  out  that  just  as  soon  as  she  came  to  be  imbued 
with  the  love  of  culture  her  military  power  began  to 
decline.  The  time  was  long  in  coming  to  the  world 
when  it  would  be  possible  for  any  state  both  to  en- 
courage intellectual  enterprise  and  to  preserve  its  most 
precious  fruits. 

§  123.  The  time  which  the  native  historiographers  allow 
to  the  new  dynasty  is  577  years,  as  we  learn  from  the  con- 
tinuation of  the  list  of  kings  already  mentioned  (§  119). 
This  means,  doubtless,  that  a  single  influence  was  predomi- 
nant during  all  this  long  period,  that  no  irruption  from  with- 
out or  uprising  from  within  was  sufficiently  serious  to  shake 
the  dominion  of  the  race  of  freebooters  from  the  north- 
eastern mountains.  Accordingly,  if  we  find  any  ruler 
cited  within  these  limits  of  time  whose  name  is  plainly 

1  The  multitude  and  variety  of  the  "  contract  tablets  "  and  kindred 
documents  which  are  extant  from  the  time  of  Chammurabi  onwards,  »s 
well  as  the  copies  of  ancient  social  and  business  laws  which  have  been 
preserved,  are,  of  themselves,  a  sufficient  indication  of  the  activity  of  this 
class  of  Babylonian  citizens. 


CH.  Ill,  §  123  RULE   OF   THE   KASSHITES  149 

Semitic,  the  phenomenon  is  to  be  explained  upon  the 
natural  assumption  that  the  adoption  of  Babylonian  man- 
ners brought  with  it  eventually  a  change  in  the  proper 
names  of  the  ruling  class,  though  these  are  the  last  of  all 
species  of  words  to  be  affected  by  linguistic  environment. 
Of  the  earlier  kings  of  this  dynasty  we  know  nothing  but 
the  names,  and  of  the  nature  of  their  conquest  we  know 
nothing  definitely.  An  inscription  1  which  we  fortunately 
possess,  thanks  to  the  zeal  of  scholars  of  the  Assyrian  king 
Asshurbanipal,  who  copied  it  from  its  Babylonian  original, 
gives  us  some  interesting  facts  about  a  time  not  very 
remote  from  the  final  establishment  of  the  Kasshite  regime. 
It  proceeds  from  a  ruler,  Agurn  (-kak-rime)  by  name 
(c.  1(300  B.C.),  who  was  apparently  the  seventh  king  of 
the  new  dynasty.  From  his  titles  we  see  clearly  that  the 
Kasshites  were  now  the  ruling  race;  that  Babylonia 
proper  was  reckoned  one  of  their  subject  states ;  that  the 
borderland  between  Elam  and  Babylonia  had  been  annexed ; 
and  that  all  the  country  north  to  the  Lower  Zab  and  east  to 
Media  was  consolidated  under  the  same  dominion.  The 
most  interesting  portion  of  the  inscription  is  that  which 
relates  to  a  certain  country  named  Hdnu,  from  which 
Agum-kak-rime  obtained,  through  an  embassy  sent  for  that 
purpose,  the  images  of  the  god  Merodach  and  his  spouse 
Zarpanit,  which  had  been  taken  away  from  Babylon.  This 
region  is  proved  to  have  been  a  portion  of  Northern  Syria.2 
The  account  is  of  value,  in  the  first  place,  as  indicating 
the  degree  of  political  decline  into  which  Babylon  had 
lapsed  when  its  chief  deities  had  been  abducted  by  foreign 
invaders.  The  act  of  Agum-kak-rime  in  securing  their 
restoration  was,  of  course,  a  measure  for  Babylonia  of  self- 

iVR.  33.  See  Delitzsch,  Kossiier,  56  ff. ;  Hommel,  GBA  421  ff. ; 
Jensen  in  KB.  Ill,  1,  p.  134  ft.  ;  cf.  TSBA.  Ill,  373  ff.  IV,  138  ff. 

-  Hommel  GBA.  424  f.;  Jensen  in  KB.  Ill,  1  I.e.  Hommel  thinks 
that  the  name  is  connected  with  Hatte  (Hettites)  by  the  addition  of  the 
feminine  ending.  If  this  were  proved,  the  facts  above  detailed  would 
have  great  historic  significance. 


150  AN   INVASION  FROM   THE   FAR   WEST          BOOK  II 

preservation,  for  without  her  gods  her  autonomy  was  seri- 
ously impaired.  Again,  the  rehabilitation  and  adornment 
of  the  statues  and  the  embellishment  of  the  proper  temple 
of  Babylon  (Bit-elu,  §  117),  which  are  described  circum- 
stantially, indicate  the  unabated  resources  and  accumulated 
wealth  of  the  land  which  the  Kasshite  rulers  were  restoring 
to  power.  Finally,  the  deportation  of  the  precious  statues 
to  the  region  mentioned,  and  the  negotiations  for  their 
return,  furnish  a  suggestive  glimpse  into  the  relations 
between  the  East  and  West.  We  have  been  accustomed 
to  think  of  Babylonia  as  the  aggressor  in  any  sort  of 
conflict  with  the  Western  peoples,  and  there  is  abundant 
evidence  in  monuments  lately  discovered  (§  153  f.),  of 
influence  widespread  and  profound,  and  lasting  for  many 
centuries,  exercised  by  the  Babylonian  mind  over  Syria 
and  Palestine, —  so  thoroughgoing,  indeed,  that  the  in- 
stance just  mentioned  of  an  invasion  from  the  West  must 
be  regarded  as  quite  exceptional.  Moreover,  as  we  shall 
see  presently  (§  149),  the  rulers  of  the  Kasshite  era  were 
as  eager  as  their  predecessors  to  maintain  Babylonian  con- 
trol among  the  Western  peoples,  as  far  as  it  could  be 
exerted. 

§  124.  We  are  now  come  to  a  point  in  the  history  of 
Babylonia  where  we  have  the  clearest  signs  that  her  long 
predominance  is  at  an  end.  To  account  for  her  changed 
position  and  the  altered  face  of  Western  Asia  generally,  it 
will  be  necessary  to  look  at  the  other  leading  communi- 
ties, old  or  new,  which  came  to  be  her  competitors.  In 
the  history  of  the  next  thousand  years,  till  the  rise  of  the 
Chaldiean  monarchy,  Babylonia  will  necessarily  occupy  a 
secondary  place.  The  causes  which  thus  restricted  her 
influence  to  her  own  proper  home  decided  also  the  fate  of 
the  West-land.  The  determining  political  force  during 
most  of  this  long  period  was  Assyria,  a  Babylonian  colony 
which  finally  dominated  both  the  mother  country  and  all 
the  rest  of  Hither  Asia.  Accordingly,  this  great  monarchy 
will  occupy  a  leading  place  in  the  subsequent  narrative. 


CH.  Ill,  §  124  DECLINE    OF  BABYLONIA  151 

We  can,  however,  best  deal  with  its  rise  and  achievements, 
as  well  as  with  Semitic  affairs  generally,  after  we  have 
considered  the  early  condition  of  the  West-land,  whose  fate 
was  so  closely  bound  up  from  the  beginning  with  that  of 
the  empires  of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris. 


BOOK  III 
CANAANITES,  EGYPTIANS,  AND  HETTITES 

CHAPTER  I 

PALESTINE  AND   ITS   EARLIEST  PEOPLES 

§  125.  IN  connection  with  the  early  history  of  the 
Babylonian  and  neighbouring  Mesopotamia!!  lands,  we  had 
occasion  to  describe  the  territory  lying  to  the  east  of  the 
Euphrates  (§  71  f.).  To  the  ancients,  the  dividing-line 
of  the  whole  of  Western  Asia  was  the  Great  River1 
(cf .  §  22).  But  with  the  making  of  the  historic  countries 
of  the  West-land  the  Euphrates  had  nothing  to  do ;  for,  turn- 
ing off  sharply  from  the  coast,  it  gave  its  waterways  and 
its  potential  riches  to  the  East.  Of  the  immense  region 
on  the  hither  side  of  the  River,  but  a  small  strip  of  high- 
land along  the  Mediterranean  is  to  be  taken  account  of  for 
our  present  purposes,  since  the  desert  remainder  was  the 
home  of  Arabs,  of  the  South  Semitic  stock,  who  only 
incidentally  and  in  a  very  subsidiary  way  contributed  to 
the  development  of  pre-Christian  civilization.  Closely 
associated  in  cultural  development  with  this  territory,  was 
the  island  of  Cyprus,  nearly  as  large  as  Palestine,  within 
a  day's  sail  of  Northern  Phoenicia.  This  ridge  of  land 

1  The  Hebrew  conception  is  familiar  from  the  frequent  allusions  of  the 
Old  Testament.  The  Babylonian  view  of  the  matter  may  be  gathered, 
for  example,  from  V  R.  64,  col.  I,  41,  where  Nabonidus  speaks  of  Gaza 
and  "  the  Upper  Sea  on  the  other  side  of  the  Euphrates." 

152 


CH.  I,  §  126     THE   COAST-LAND   AND   ITS   PEOPLES  153 

between  the  sea  and  desert  had  not  more  than  forty  or  fifty 
miles  of  average  breadth,  with  a  length  of  four  hundred 
miles.  It  might  be  divided  roughly  into  four  regions.  In 
the  north  were  the  deep  valleys  and  high  mountains  of  the 
spurs  of  the  Taurus  range,  chiefly  Mount  Amanus,  reach- 
ino-  as  far  south  as  Antioch  and  the  mouth  of  the  Orontes 

O 

River.  Then  come  three  very  remarkable  stretches  of  high- 
land :  the  first  unequally  divided  by  the  Orontes,  reaching  as 
far  south  as  Hamath  and  Arvad;  the  second  more  equally 
divided  into  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon  by  the  upper 
course  of  the  Orontes  and  by  the  Litany,  extending  to  the 
foot  of  Hermon ;  and  the  third  cleft  by  the  deep-flowing 
Jordan.  With  these  four  sections  corresponds,  in  general, 
the  popular  and  useful  division  into  North,  Central,  and 
Southern  Syria,  and  Palestine.  How  these  districts  came 
to  be  occupied  in  historic  times  we  shall  have  occasion  to 
mention  later  (§  161  f.,  201  f. ;  cf.  24  ff.).  In  the  earliest 
ages  we  know  only  with  certainty  of  Canaanites  and 
Amorites,  as  far  north  as  Cuelo-Syria;  and  it  is  not  until 
the  Egyptian  wars  in  Asia  that  we  begin  to  learn  vaguely 
something  of  the  peoples  of  Middle  and  Xorthern  Syria. 

§  126.  Anything  like  exact  knowledge  of  the  ancient 
inhabitants  of  these  regions  can  be  gained  only  of  the 
Canaanitic  branch  of  the  family  (§  2-1,  26).  When  and 
where  they  first  established  themselves  in  permanent  settle- 
ments are  matters  which  elude,  and  perhaps  always  will 
elude,  exact  historical  research.1  We  may  take  for  granted 
that  the  time  wras  subsequent  to  the  development  of  the 
country  along  the  Lower  Euphrates,  which  was  naturally 
seized  by  the  first  settled  people  of  the  race  (§  23),  as 
being,  among  all  the  regions  occupied  by  the  Semites,  the 
most  easily  utilized  for  extensive  agricultural  operations. 
Whether  the  occupation  of  the  West-land  preceded  the 
earliest  development  of  Egypt  is  more  difficult  to  deter- 
mine. As  to  the  question  of  the  actual  earlier  civilization, 
the  presumption  is  in  favour  of  the  latter  country,  though 

1  Cf.  Note  3,  on  the  Phoenician  settlements,  in  the  Appendix. 


154  THE   PEOPLING   OF   CANAAN  BOOK  III 

a  large  part  of  Palestine,  at  least,  may  have  been  occupied 
by  Semitic  nomads,  before  land  was  cultivated  and  village 
life  instituted  in  the  valley  of  the  Nile.  The  Semites  who 
crossed  the  Isthmus  and  whose  descendants,  intermingling 
with  an  African  race,  became  the  ancestors  of  the  historic 
ancient  Egyptians,  must  have  known  of  the  fertile  pasture- 
lands  of  Moab  and  Bashan,  and  we  may  therefore  suppose 
that  some  of  their  contemporaries  made  at  least  a  temporary 
occupation  of  these  districts.  In  fact,  we  may  assume  that 
the  same  influx  into  Palestine  of  Arabian  settlers  from  the 
desert,  which  we  know  to  have  constantly  taken  place  in 
historical  times,  was  begun  and  continued  in  the  earliest 
stages  of  organized  Semitism.  But  we  would  probably  go 
very  far  wrong,  if  we  were  to  imagine  that  Canaan  was 
entirely  peopled  from  this  source.  Apart  from  the  prob- 
lematic origin  of  the  Amorites  (§  131),  we  have  to  hold 
that  the  main  stock  of  the  oldest  settlements  of  Canaan 
was  not  of  Arabian  derivation.  Just  as  in  the  later 
better-known  times  the  immigrants  from  the  South  changed 
their  language  and  their  manners  by  being  absorbed  into 
the  predominating  Canaanitic  population,  so  it  must  have 
been  in  prehistoric  ages,  else  the  character  of  the  people  of 
Canaan,  their  religion,  and  their  institutions  generally, 
would  have  been  very  different  from  what  their  whole 
accessible  record  shows  them  to  have  been.  We  have 
rather  to  represent  the  peopling  of  Canaan  as  having  been 
effected  from  the  North,  and  under  the  following  general 
conditions.  The  ancestors  of  Canaanites,  Aramaeans,  and 
Babylonians  alike,  are  shown,  by  the  conclusive  evidence 
of  linguistic  community  and  similarity  of  institutions,  to 
have  once  lived  in  close  association  as  nomads  in  some 
portion  of  the  ancient  Semitic  realm.  According  to  our 
best  light,  their  camping-ground  was  northeast  Arabia 
(§  21).  The  Babylonians  having  utilized  the  Lower 
Euphrates  valley,  the  Canaanites  also  became  weaned  from 
the  life  of  the  desert,  and  in  the  search  for  the  conditions 
of  a  more  settled  habitation,  they  followed  the  Euphrates, 


CH.  I,  §  127         THE   TWO   TYPES   OF    CAXAANITES  155 

and  finally  crossed  it,  being  perhaps  pushed  onward  by 
their  kindred  of  Aramaean  stock,  who  followed  in  their 
steps,  but  yet  deferred  till  historical  times  their  passage  of 
the  River  in  a  collective  capacity  (§  201).  The  advanced 
sections  moved  on  westward,  and  occupying  the  sea-land, 
became  Phoenician  mariners  and  merchants.  The  succeed- 
ing bodies  settled  with  their  flocks  and  herds  in  the  valleys 
and  on  the  mountain  slopes  of  the  central  highlands.  The 
two  divisions  thus  formed  two  types  of  people,  though  so 
closely  allied  in  all  the  marks  of  unity  of  race.  Which  of 
the  two  bands  or  groups  of  colonists  first  developed  into 
cultured  city-builders  we  cannot  as  yet  certainly  tell.  Of 
the  Canaanites  as  a  whole,  we  can  speak  negatively  on 
this  general  question  with  some  confidence.  The  rise  of 
cities  and  the  growth  of  a  high  order  of  culture  was  in  this 
Mediterranean  coast-land  necessarily  a  very  slow  and  grad- 
ual process,  for  the  reason  that  large  tracts  of  arable  land 
do  not  exist  in  that  diversified  region;  and  agriculture, 
the  necessary  basis  of  a  complex  civilization,  was  always 
pursued  there  under  serious  disadvantages  as  compared 
with  Egypt  and  Babylonia.  No  important  city,  in  fact, 
between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Mediterranean,  owed  the 
decisive  beginnings  of  its  growth  to  the  richness  of  the 
circumjacent  soil.  Carchemish  and  Damascus  were  trad- 
ing-posts, the  latter  in  a  sort  of  oasis;  Tyre  and  Sidon 
were  the  product  of  a  manifold  commerce ;  and  Jerusalem, 
as  a  town  of  more  than  tribal  or  sectional  importance,  was 
a  creation  of  political  and  religious  life.  The  contrast 
with  the  old-time  cities  on  the  Euphrates  and  the  Nile  is 
striking  and  obvious.  The  political  and  social  develop- 
ment of  Palestine  and  Syria  Avas  accordingly  slow;  and 
whatever  view  we  may  hold  as  to  priority  in  the  initial 
stage,  we  have  to  concede  that  in  culture  and  material 
progress  they  were  in  the  earliest  historical  times  left  far 
behind  by  Egypt  and  Babylonia. 

§  127.    Another  consequence  of  the  diversified  character 
of  the  physical  geography  of  this  region  was  the  fact  that 


156  DIVARICATION   OF   PEOPLES  BOOK  III 

it  helped  to  prevent  an  amalgamation  of  the  various  tribes 
and  races  that  settled  in  it.  The  highlands  and  the  low- 
lands, the  pasture-grounds  and  the  wooded  hills,  the  outly- 
ing wildernesses,  and  the  well-watered  mountain  slopes 
and  plains,  not  only  gave  rise  to  a  great  variety  of  pursuits 
among  the  population,  but  served  also  to  perpetuate  local 
and  tribal  distinctions.  Hence  the  bewildering1  classifica- 

o 

tion  of  the  inhabitants  found  in  the  earliest  books  of  the 
Bible.  The  cleavage  reaches  much  deeper  than  any 
popular  division,  such  as  that  into  peasants  or  "  Perizzites, " 
villagers  or  "Hivites,"  and  Bedawin  or  "mixed  multi- 
tude." The  distinction  between  Amorite  and  Canaanite 
is,  for  example,  consciously  kept  up  by  Old  Testament 
writers  (§  134) ;  and  the  separate  existence  of  Moabite, 
Ammonite,  and  Edomite  continued  to  the  very  end  of  Old 
Testament  history.  Thus  the  physical  conditions  of  their 
habitat  had  as  much  to  do  with  the  mutual  repulsion  of 
the  communities  of  Palestine  as  had  the  political  tendencies 
and  traditions  which  they  shared  in  large  measure  with 
the  rest  of  the  Semitic  peoples  (§  35,  37). 

§  128.  The  geographical  position  of  Palestine,  ending 
as  it  did  the  long,  crescent-shaped  belt  of  habitable  land 
that  stretched  from  the  Persian  Gulf  along  the  borders  of 
the  desert  to  the  frontiers  of  Egypt,  made  it  for  long  ages 
the  natural  goal  of  the  military  and  commercial  expeditions 
undertaken  by  the  kings  of  Babylonia.  Afterwards,  when 
Egypt  had  come  to  be  a  leading  power  in  the  world,  the 
same  region  offered  a  suitable  field  for  the  ambition  of  that 
monarchy,  whose  progress  eastward  was  impeded,  not  by 
Canaanites  alone,  but  by  Hettites,  Aramaeans,  and  Assyri- 
ans. Thus  Palestine  came  to  be  the  chief  battle-ground 
of  Western  Asia,  just  as  in  times  much  later  it  played  the 
same  passive  but  fateful  r61e,  as  lying  close  to  the  great 
highway  trodden  by  Persian,  Greek,  and  Roman  armies, 
and.  later  still,  by  Saracens  and  Crusaders.  Of  great 
importance  also  was  its  intermediate  position  for  trade  and 
commerce.  Not  only  in  maritime  enterprise,  in  which  its 


CH.  I,  §  129     INTERNATIONAL    HOLE   OF   PALESTINE  157 

few  natural  harbours  made  it  a  pioneer  and  a  leader 
(§  42,  66),  but  in  land  traffic  also,  it  long  played  a  most 
influential  even  if  auxiliary  arid  intermediary  part,  since 
it  furnished  the  high-road  between  Babylonia,  Assyria,  or 
Mesopotamia,  and  Egypt  or  Southern  Arabia.  It  is  obvi- 
ous, however,  that  unless  their  whole  territory  were  to  be 
compacted  into  a  single  homogeneous  state,  Palestine  and 
Syria  could  never  hold  a  position  in  the  affairs  of  the 
world  equal  to  that  maintained  by  Babylonia,  Assyria,  or 
Egypt.  Indeed,  the  importance  of  the  West-land  lay  in 
the  fact  that  it  was  coveted  and  its  possession  striven  for 
over  and  over  again  by  each  of  these  leading  monarchies. 
Its  advantages  to  any  power  which  should  possess  or  con- 
trol it  are  already  indicated  in  what  has  just  been  stated. 
Its  natural  resources  were  not  to  be  despised.  But  more 
important  still  were  its  seaports  and  its  fortresses,  by 
which  the  trade  by  sea  and  land  could  be  secured  and 
utilized.  Any  foreign  state  that  took  tribute  from  Damas- 
cus and  Tyre  made  these  communities  its  agents  in 
tolling  the  richly  laden  caravans  that  did  most  of  the 
traffic  of  Western  Asia,  and  the  "ships  of  Tarshish," 
which  bore  to  the  distributing-point  in  Phoenicia  the 
costly  freights  of  Western  and  Southern  Europe.  Again, 
the  actual  possession  by  Egypt,  Babylonia,  or  Assyria,  of 
such  a  fortress  as  Jerusalem  or  Samaria,  guaranteed  the 
absolute  integrity  of  the  intervening  territory.  Considera- 
tions such  as  these  must  be  borne  in  mind  in  connection 
with  the  whole  history  of  Israel,  especially  in  their  bearings 
upon  its  foreign  policy. 

§  129.  Who  were  the  primitive  inhabitants  of  Palestine 
it  is  impossible  to  determine.  The  Bible,  which  interferes 
in  political  history  to  tell  in  detail  the  story  of  Palestine 
alone,  begins  its  continuous  narrative  at  a  comparatively 
late  date  in  historic  times,  and  alludes  very  meagrely  to 
prehistoric  conditions.  Its  statements  as  to  early  peoples 
and  localities,  supplemented  from  Egyptian  and  Babylo- 
nian sources,  we  shall  attempt  to  summarize  in  this  and  the 


158  PALESTINE   AND   ITS  PEOPLES  BOOK  III 

following  sections.  The  country  which  we  call  Palestine, 
extending  from  Mount  Hermon  to  Mount  Seir,  and  from 
Hauran  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  is  parted  into  two  great 
divisions  by  the  valley  of  the  Jordan.  This  natural 
separation  is  recognized  by  the  Old  Testament,  which  calls 
the  country  west  of  the  Jordan  Canaan,  and  names  the 
eastern  section  Gilead.  There  was  no  wider  designation 
for  the  whole  country  than  Canaan,  and  after  the  Hebrews 
had  occupied  it,  the  name  Israel  took  its  place,  though  not 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  old  appellation.1  Inasmuch  as  the 
Bible  interests  itself  primarily  not  in  places  but  in  their 
inhabitants,  the  name  "  Canaan  "  is  naturally  to  be  con- 
sidered as  the  country  of  the  "Canaanites."  This  latter 
term  normally  takes  the  lead  in  the  familiar  enumerations 
of  tribes  and  peoples  which  occupied  the  whole  country 
before  the  incursion  of  the  Israelites.  We  can  therefore 
better  understand  its  somewhat  variable  usage  after  we 
have  defined  the  accompanying  Gentile  designations.  It 
should  be  observed,  in  general,  however,  that  for  the 
question  of  priority  of  occupation  of  the  country,  the  old 
Babylonian  designations  are  of  more  significance  than  the 
Biblical  terms,  since  they  belong  to  a  much  earlier  period. 
§  130.  Along  with  the  Canaanites  appear  the  Amorites, 
Hettites,  Hivites,  Jebusites,  Perizzites,  and  Girgashites.2 
Of  these  the  "  Hettites  "  were  small  parties  of  colonists  who, 
after  their  Northern  conquerors  obtained  a  footing  in  Syria 
(§  157  ff.),  may  have  moved  onward  in  detachments  and 
settled  in  Southern  Palestine.  They  never  exercised  any 
influence  as  a  people  in  the  affairs  of  the  country.3  The 
"Hivites,  villagers,"  had  their  chief  seat,  according  to  the 

1  See  1  Sam.  xiii.  19  ;  2  K.  vi.  23.  In  Isa.  xix.  24  "  Israel "  is  evidently 
equivalent  to  "  Canaan"  in  v.  18. 

-  In  Gen.  xv.  19-21,  the  usual  group  of  seven  is  augmented  to  ten. 
The  Hivites  are  dropped,  and  to  the  Rephaim  who  take  their  place  are 
added,  "  Kenite,  Kenizzite,  and  Kadmonite."  See  also  Gen.  x.  15-18. 

3  In  Josh.  xi.  3,  the  LXX  read  (cf.  Jud.  iii.  3):  "Hettites  under 
Hermon."  With  this  compare  the  amended  reading  2  S.  xxiv.  6:  "to 
the  land  of  the  Hettites,  to  Kadesh."  This  shows  that  the  Old  Testament 


CH.  I,  §  131  AMORITE   AND   CANAANITE  159 

received  text,  to  the  east  and  northeast  of  Mount  Hermon.1 
But  they  had  several  cities  in  Central  Palestine,  notably 
Shechem  and  Gibeon.2  The  "  Jebusites  "  were  merely  the 
inhabitants  of  Jebus,  the  ancient  name  of  the  fortress  of 
Zion.  The  "Perizzites"  seem  to  have  designated  the 
peasants,  or  dwellers  in  the  open  country,  as  distinguished 
from  the  residents  of  the  towns.  Of  the  "  Girgashites  " 
nothing  is  known,3  and  they  could  have  formed  at  most 
a  very  insignificant  section  of  the  people.  The  local  and 
comparatively  unimportant  character  of  these  tribes  is 
thus  manifest.  Quite  otherwise  was  it  with  the  remain- 
ing member  of  the  group,  the  Amorites.  As  the  true 
relations  of  this  people  are  difficult  to  determine,  it  will 
be  well  to  see  how  they  are  distinguished  in  the  Hebrew 
records  from  the  Canaanites. 

§  131.  The  following  is  a  fair  summary  of  a  strictly 
Biblical  investigation.  First,  "Canaanite"  is  both  a 
geographical  and  ethnical  term.  Second,  neither  the  land 
of  Canaan  nor  the  people  are  ever  assigned  to  the  east  of 
the  Jordan.  Third,  they  are  confined,  as  a  race,  to  the 
coast-land  of  Palestine  and  the  "  Sidonian  "  country  north 
of  the  plain  of  Jezreel,  as  far  as  the  Jordan.  Finally, 
"  Canaanite  "  may  be  used  for  the  inhabitants  of  any  part 
of  the  land  west  of  Jordan,  or  the  "land  of  Canaan,"  even 
when  the  same  peoples  are  elsewhere  designated  by  their 
proper  tribal  or  racial  and  local  name.  This  usage  may 

recognizes  the  other  more  influential  Hettite  settlement  outside  the 
limits  of  Canaan,  though  these  references  are  to  be  taken  in  a  vague, 
traditional  sense  (§  201). 

1  Josh.  xi.  3  (cf.  vs.  8,  17,  10)  ;  Jud.  iii.  3.  But  perhaps  Hettites  is  to 
be  read  here  in  each  case.  Cf.  Wellhausen,  Text  Samnelis,  p.  218,  and 
Meyer,  ZATW.  I,  126. 

-  Gen.  xxxiv.  2  ;  Josh.  ix.  17.  In  Josh.  ix.  7  the  people  of  Gibeon  are 
called  Hivites,  but  in  2  S.  xxi.  2  they  are  reckoned  among  the  Amorites. 
It  is  plain,  however,  that  here  the  term  Amorites  is  used  in  the  wide 
sense  (see  below),  for  the  pre-Israelitish  inhabitants  generally  of  the 
central  highlands. 

3  The  "  Gergesenes,"  Matt.  viii.  28,  is  notoriously  a  false  reading  for 
"  Gerasenes  "  —  east  of  the  sea  of  Galilee. 


160  CANAANITES    WERE   NOT   AMORITES          BOOK  III 

fairly  be  claimed  to  have  a  geographical  basis.  "  Amorite, " 
on  the  other  hand,  is  always  a  racial  and  not  a  geographi- 
cal expression.1  The  Amorites  are  never  placed  in  the 
coast-land,  nor  in  any  locality  in  the  northern  half  of 
Canaan  proper,  nor  in  any  of  the  great  valleys 2  or  the 
lowlands  generally.  The  places  definitely  assigned  them 
are  in  the  highest  lands  Avest  of  the  Jordan.  From  their 
prominence  in  the  early  times  of  the  Israelitish  settlement, 
they  are,  however,  sometimes  used  roughly  for  the  peoples 
generally  with  whom  Israel  had  to  do  east  of  the  coast- 
land.  Yet  the  two  terms  are  really  not  coextensive  or 
interconvertible  beyond  definable  limits,  as  is  shown  by 
the  fact  that  while  "  Canaanite  "  is  sometimes  used  for 
"Amorite"  in  the  racial  sense,  "  Amorite  "  is  never  used 
for  "  Canaanite "  in  the  same  sense.  The  conclusion 
would  therefore  seem  to  be  justified  that  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment the  two  names  answer  to  two  distinct  peoples,  though 
it  is  impossible  as  yet  to  say  with  certainty  how  far  the 
one  was  removed  from  the  other  in  point  of  origin  and 
date  of  settlement.3  As  to  the  old  theory  that  the  Canaan- 
ites  inhabited  the  lowlands  4  of  Palestine,  and  the  Amorites 
the  highlands,  it  appears  to  correspond  on  the  whole,  how- 

1  The  Egyptian  usage  seems  to  confirm  this  distinction  ;  for  while  it  is 
called  pa  Kan  ana,  "  the  Canaan"  (an  appellative),  it  is  also  called  the 
land  Amur,  "the  land  of  the  Amorites."  So  apparently  the  Assyrian 
equivalent  of  the  latter  (§  133). 

-  Jud.  i.  34  cannot  be  justly  regarded  as  an  exception,  since  the  valley 
of  Ajalon  is  700  feet  above  the  sea,  and  of  small  extent. 

3  Too  much  stress  cannot  be  laid  upon  the  nomenclature  of  the  ancient 
Babylonians  as  providing  criteria  of  relative  antiquity  among  the  peoples 
of  Western  Asia.     Xow  it  appears  that  they  called  the  country  "  the  land 
of  Amur"  (§  133)  from  the  earliest  times,  while  "Canaan"  was  disre- 
garded by  them.     Hence  we  may  assume,  in  the   mean  time,  that  the 
Amorites  occupied  and  gave  distinction  to  Palestine  before  the  entrance 
of  the  Canaan ites.     The  Egyptian  names  furnish  no  ground  for  an  opinion 
either  way. 

4  Professor  G.  F.   Moore,  in  PAOS.   1800,  p.  67  ff.,  disproves  the  old 
theory  that  |Ui-  means  "  low  country."     This  derivation  has  long  been 
considered   dubious,    and   etymology  is    naturally   a    very   subordinate 
kind  of  evidence  here. 


CH.  I,  §  Io2       EGYPTIAN   NOTIONS   OF   PALESTINE  161 

ever   casually,   pretty   nearly   with    the    Biblical    state- 
ments.1 

§  132.  A  few  words  will  suffice  to  set  forth  the  ancient 
Egyptian  and  Babylonian  conceptions  of  Palestine,  Syria, 
and  their  peoples,  as  far  as  our  meagre  knowledge  extends. 
Naturally  we  learn  of  Western  Asia  from  the  Egyptian 
monuments  only  after  it  was  brought  into  close  relations 
with  Egypt,  that  is,  only  after  the  days  of  the  old  empire  of 
Memphis.  The  name  Zahi  seems  to  have  been  employed 
to  designate  the  whole  region  between  the  southern  border 
of  Palestine  and  the  Euphrates,  while  various  appellations 
were  given  to  its  several  natural  divisions.  Palestine  was 
known  as  pa  Kanana,  "the  Canaan,"  also  Rutenu.  The 
latter,  a  favourite  name,  having  been  extended  to  the  whole 
of  Syria,  a  distinction  was  made  between  "  Upper  Rutenu  " 
or  the  high  lands  of  Palestine,  and  "Lower  Rutenu,''  or 
the  low  lands  of  Syria  proper  and  Ccelo-Syria.  The  latter 
region  was  also,  in  the  Hettite  times,  called  "the  great 
land  of  Hetta,"  but  this  is  scarcely  a  geographical  term  in 
the  strict  sense.  The  Phoenician  coast-land  \vas  called 
Kaftu.  Edom  was  known  as  Adem  as  early  as  the  twelfth 
dynasty.  Western  Mesopotamia  was  referred  to  under  the 
Aramaic  form  Naharain,  the  well-known  Biblical  C^~in3i 
the  same  country,  virtually,  which  its  inhabitants  in  the 
fifteenth  century  called  Mitdni.  The  peoples  inhabiting 
these  districts  were  denominated  in  general  Amu2  —  possi- 
bly a  relic  of  the  old  Egyptio-Semitic  times.  The  Bib- 
lical Amorites  are  recognized  in  the  phrase  "the  land  of 
Amur."  Another  designation  of  the  people  of  Palestine 

1  This  view  is  still  maintained  by  some  careful  modern  scholars  such  as 
George  Adam  Smith  (Historical  Geography  of  Palestine,  in  Espnsitnr, 
1802).  The  whole  theory  of  a  distinction  between  the  peoples  is  rejected 
by  a  group  of  distinguished  critics  in  favour  of  the  opinion  that  '•  Canaanite  " 
and  "  Amorite "  virtually  mean  the  same  thing,  the  two  words  being 
used  by  two  different  authors  of  the  Ilexateuch.  The  influence  of  these 
authorities  is  so  great  that  it  will  be  necessary  to  make  a  fuller  statement 
of  their  main  positions.  See  Note  4  in  Appendix. 

-  Of.  Hebr.  C17,  "people"? 

M 


162  BABYLONIAN   NOMENCLATURE  BOOK  III 

is  Haru.1  The  inhabitants  of  Kaftu,  or  Phoenicia,  ars 
called  Fenhu  (cf  .  QoiviKes).  The  nomads  of  North  and 
Northwest  Arabia  and  Southern  Palestine  are  known  to 
the  Egyptians  as  Sasu  or  "Shepherds,"2  or  Bedawin.3 

§  133.  In  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  records  the 
general  name  of  Palestine,  including  Phoenicia,  is  mat 
Amuri.*-  Along  with  this  we  have  mat  Hatte  (or  Hette), 
the  land  of  the  Hettites,  which  was  originally  applied  to 
Northern  Syria,  but  in  the  later  inscriptions  (e.g.  those  of 
Sinacherib)  was  extended  to  include  Palestine  also,  and 
even  Cyprus.  This  island,  of  the  very  first  importance  from 
the  earliest  times,  was  by  the  Egyptians  called  Asi  (from 
which  possibly  we  have  the  name  Asia)  and  by  the  Assyr- 
ians, Yatnan.  From  the  ninth  century  onward,  frequent 
reference  is  made  in  the  cuneiform  Inscriptions  to  the 
several  political  divisions  of  Palestine  and  Syria,  and  that 
usually  by  names  familiar  to  us  from  the  Old  Testament. 
They  do  not  need  to  be  enumerated  here,  as  we  shall  have 
frequent  occasion  to  cite  them  later.  It  is  noteworthy  that 
the  name  "  Israel  "  is,  so  far,  found  only  once  (§  228),  and 
then  it  designates  the  "Northern  kingdom,"  which  is  else- 
where called  Samerlna. 


1  The  word  very  strikingly  suggests  the  supposed  J.M™,  "the  West" 
of  the  Babylonians  or  Assyrians  ;  but  see  below  for  another  reading  of 
the  latter. 

2  Cf.  Gen.  xlvi.  34. 

3  In  the  above  details  I  have  mainly  followed  Meyer,  GA.  §  180.     Cf. 
Maspero,  Histoire  ancienne,  p.  175  ff. 

4  That  is,  the  land  of  Amur.    Usually  the  word  has  been  read  Aharu(i), 
which  would  literally  mean  "  west  '  '  (TnK)  .     It  would,  however,  be  strange 
that  the  Babylonians  should  pick  out   Palestine   alone,  of  all  western 
countries,  as  the  "Western  land."     Proper  names  of  countries  are  not 
wont  to  be  coined  in  such  a  fashion.     That  the  name  of  the  country 
should  be  used  later  as  a  synonym  for  "  West,"  is  natural  enough.     On 
the  other  hand,  we  have  the  country  called  the  land  of  the  Amorites  by 
the  Egyptians   (see  above)  ;  and  the  El  Amarna  tablets  use  the  word 
before  us  for  Palestine,  even  those  written  from  Phoenicia  itself  (Br.  M. 
collection,  Nr.  13  ;  see  note  to  p.  xlvii  by  the  editors),  which  could  hardly 
be   done   if  the  word  meant   "West-land."     If  the   reading  Amuru  is 
accepted,  it  would  go  far  to  show  the  priority  of  the  Amorites  over  the 
Canaanites  in  the  occupation  of  Palestine  (§  131,  n.). 


CHAPTER   II 

0 

ASIATIC   WEST-LAND   AND   EGYPT 

§  134.  PEKMANENT  relations  between  Egypt  and  the 
neighbouring  countries  of  Western  Asia  were  first  estab- 
lished through  the  commercial  interests  and  enterprise  of 
the  former.  From  the  earliest  known  times  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula  was  brought  into  closest  association  with  Egypt. 
On  the  one  hand,  the  nomadic  tribes  of  the  desert  were 
more  and  more  tempted  to  undertake  predatory  raids  across 
the  Isthmus  as  Egypt  grew  more  attractive  through  her 
increasing  riches ;  on  the  other,  the  civilized  dwellers  on 
the  Nile  gradually  learned  to  prize  and  to  work  the  copper 
and  malachite  deposits  of  the  Peninsula,  and  to  appro- 
priate a  share  of  the  products  of  South  and  West  Arabia, 
which  they  brought  by  ferries  over  the  Red  Sea.  Thus 
the  garrisons  which  watched  the  frontier  to  guard  against 
invasion  assumed  a  wider  jurisdiction  in  securing  the 
undisturbed  possession  of  the  mines,  and  watching  the 
spice-bearing  caravans.  It  was  in  such  a  way,  and  not 
merely  through  geographical  propinquity,  that  the  im- 
memorial claim  of  Egypt  to  the  control  of  the  Peninsula 
was  established,  —  a  claim  which  has  been  maintained 
through  countless  changes  of  rulers  and  dynasties  up  to 
the  present  day.  The  earliest  Egyptian  king  of  whom  we 
know  anything  definite,  Snefru,  of  the  Fourth  Dynasty 
(c.  3000  B.C.),  was  probably  the  actual  founder  of  the 
Egyptian  rule  in  Northwest  Arabia.  The  influence  thus 
early  secured  was  maintained  all  through  the  times  of  the 
old  Memphitic  regime,  though  sometimes  at  a  heavy  cost. 

163 


104  EARLY   EGYPT   AND   PALESTINE  BOOK  III 

as  we  find  that  Pepi  (c.  2600),  in  the  Sixth  Dynasty,  had 
to  make  a  large  levy  of  troops  among  the  subject  people  of 
Nubia,  in  order  to  contend  in  Asia  with  great  Semitic 
hordes  whom  he  succeeded  in  subduing  in  five  successive 
campaigns. 

§  135.  Quite  different  was  the  history  of  Egypt's  earli- 
est associations  with  Palestine.  We  know  of  no  attempt 
on  the  part  of  the  rulers  of  the  Nile  Valley  to  occupy  by 
force  or  other \vise  any  part  of  the  land  of  Canaan  up  to  the 
time  of  the  regime  of  the  Hyksos,  who  were  themselves  of 
an  Asiatic  origin.  That  they  had,  however,  an  interest  in 
the  country  from  the  time  of  the  foundation  of  their  own 
empire  is  morally  certain.  The  caravan  traffic,  passing 
from  Southern  and  Western  Arabia  through  Palestine  and 
Syria,  with  Babylonia  as  its  main  ultimate  destination, 
formed  a  motive  for  Egyptian  concern  in  Asiatic  affairs 
which  co-operated  with  the  natural  desire  to  secure  a  share 
of  the  products  of  Palestine,  as  well  as  of  the  growing 
maritime  trade  of  the  Phoenician  cities.  At  first,  doubt- 
less, intercourse  with  Palestine  was  carried  on  indirectly 
through  the  medium  of  foreign  caravans;  but  in  the 
Twelfth  Dynasty  we  find  clear  indications  of  lively  and 
close  communication.1  But  while  the  Egyptians  do  not 
appear  to  have  attempted  an  occupation  of  Palestine  till  a 
comparatively  late  period,  the  inhabitants  of  the  latter 
country  seem  to  have  joined  with  the  peoples  of  Arabia 
from  much  more  remote  times  in  their  incursions  into  the 
Delta.  We  learn,  for  example,  that  in  the  Ninth  and 
Tenth  dynasties  (c.  2300)  a  great  invasion  of  Egypt  was 
made  by  the  Amu,  or  Palestinians,  and  the  Shasu,  and 
that  the  country  was  for  a  time  actually  under  their  con- 
trol.2 The  prosperous  times  of  the  renowned  Twelfth 
Dynasty  (c.  2130-1930)  were  followed  by  a  period  of 

1  See  Meyer,  GA.  §  98. 

-  Nearly  coincident  in  date  with  the  Elamitic  and  Babylonian  invasions 
of  Palestine  (Gen.  xiv.  §  109  ff.).  May  not  the  one  have  been  the  occasion 

of  the  other  ? 


CH.  II,  §  130  THE    SHEPHERD   PRINCES  165 

anarchy,  and  then  came  the  rule  of  the  "  Shepherd  Princes," 
or  Hyksos. 

§  136.  The  invasion  and  domination  of  the  Hyksos,  so 
memorable  in  Egyptian  history,  are  chiefly  of  interest  to 
us  here  in  as  far  as  we  can  trace  among  this  famous  people 
a  Canaanitic  intermixture.  That  the  Hyksos  were  Semites 
of  one  sort  or  another  is  not  certain,  but  is  very  probable. 
At  any  rate,  there  followed  in  their  train  a  multitude  of 
Canaanites,  lured  on,  with  other  tribes,  by  the  promise  of 
a  wholesale  invasion  of  the  richest  and  most  assailable 
of  the  Western  lands.  And  these  immigrants  formed  the 
controlling  element  for  centuries  in  Northern  Egypt,  and 
left  deep  traces  of  their  occupation  upon  the  subsequent 
history  of  the  whole  country.  Hereafter,  Canaanitic  proper 
names  abounded  in  Egypt;  the  language  took  up  many 
Canaanitic  words,  and  deities  worshipped  by  the  same  race 
came  to  be  honoured  throughout  the  entire  Nile  Valley. 
Antecedently,  one  would  be  inclined  to  assign  the  Hyksos 
to  the  Semitic  race,  unless  we  assume  without  any  warrant 
that  these  adventurers  came  from  beyond  the  Taurus  or  the 
Tigris,  since  the  whole  country  from  the  Great  Sea  to  the 
mountains  of  Media,  and  from  Mesopotamia  to  the  Indian 
Ocean,  was  in  the  exclusive  possession  of  Semitic  peoples. 
In  fact,  the  second  part  of  the  Greek  word  Hyksos  has  been 
plausibly  associated  with  the  Sasu;  according  to  Manetho,1 
the  whole  word  means  "  Princes  of  the  Shepherds  "  (Eg. 
hek  =  "  prince ").  It  is,  to  be  sure,  difficult  upon  this 
hypothesis  to  explain  the  supposed  representations  of  the 
Hyksos  kings  on  the  contemporary  monuments,  which 
show  a  physiognomy  of  broad  faces  and  upturned  lips  unlike 
that  of  any  branch  of  the  Semitic  race.  It  is  not  certain, 
however,  that  these  monuments,  which  are  very  few,  do 
really  represent  the  "Shepherd  Princes."  Some  authori- 
ties regard  them  as  standing  for  the  original  inhabitants 

1  Josephus  against  Apion,  ch.  14.  Hyksos  should  be  Hykusos,  that  is 
the  singular  was  written  by  mistake  for  the  plural  "  Princes  of  the 
tiasn." 


166  WHO   WERE   THE    "SHEPHERDS"?  BOOK  III 

of  the  district,  similar  types,  according  to  Mariette  Bey, 
being  found  in  Menzaleh  at  the  present  time. 

§  137.  To  judge  from  the  scanty  evidence  at  our  dis- 
posal, the  most  influential  element  in  these  troops  of 
invaders  were  people  of  Palestine  rather  than  the  more 
familiar  freebooters  of  Arabia.  The  best  evidence  of  this 
is  the  fact  that  the  divinities  introduced  into  Egypt  in 
consequence  of  their  occupation  were,  as  indicated  above, 
North  Semitic,  among  them  being  Ba'al,  Astarte,  and 
Resep,1  the  Phoenician  Vulcan.  It  is  probable,  indeed, 
that  the  Egyptian  relations  of  the  Patriarchs,  as  recorded  in 
venerable  Hebrew  traditions,  were  connected  in  some  way 
with  the  movements  of  the  nomads  of  Palestine  and  the 
border-land  towards  the  fertile  pastures  of  the  Delta.  It  is 
certainly  not  a  mere  coincidence  that  is  indicated  in  the 
information  of  Num.  xiii.  22,  to  the  effect  that  Hebron,  in 
Southern  Palestine,  "was  built  seven  years  before  Zoan  in 
Egypt,"  Zoan  or  Tanis  being  the  Hyksos  capital.  As  will 
appear  presently,  the  type  of  civilization  prevalent  in 
Palestine  in  this  epoch  was  pastoral  rather  than  agricul- 
tural, the  country  being  traversed  by  a  population  liable, 
like  the  Patriarchs,  to  change  their  residence  at  any  time. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  would  be  too  much  to  say  that  the 
invading  hosts  were  wholly  or  even  principally  Canaan- 
itic.  Their  number  alone  is  an  indication  to  the  contrary. 
It  has  been  the  custom  to  seek  the  origin  of  these  mysteri- 
ous strangers  in  some  remote  region  of  Western  Asia,  and 
to  ascribe  their  migration  to  the  pressure  of  the  Scythians, 
or  some  such  equally  obscure  and  formidable  race  of 
barbarians.  It  is  not  necessary  to  go  so  far  from  the  borders 
of  Egypt  to  find  the  home  of  the  immigrants.  They  were 
most  probably  inhabitants  of  Syria  and  Mesopotamia,  who 
were  urged  irresistibly  westward,  partly  by  lust  of  spolia- 
tion and  conquest,  and  partly  by  indisposition  to  pay  toll 
and  tribute  to  the  ubiquitous  and  exacting  Babylonian, 

1  Meyer,  GA.  §  109. 


CH.  II,  §  139  PALESTINE   ABOUT   2000  B.C.  167 

whose  pressure  had  perhaps  been  already  felt  in  the  pre- 
ceding great  Asiatic  invasion  of  Egypt  (§  135). 

§  138.  A  broadly  and  indistinctly  drawn  picture  of  what 
Palestine  and  Syria  were  about  2000  B.C.  maybe  delineated 
somewhat  as  follows.  Of  the  country  east  of  Jordan,  we 
can  only  infer  from  later  indications  that  the  fertile  plains 
of  Moab  were  occupied  by  shepherds  with  their  flocks,  and 
that  the  spices  and  incense  of  Gilead  had  begun  to  attract 
cultivators  and  traders  (cf.  Gen.  xxxvii.  25).  Of  the 
western  country,  the  central  and  southern  portions  were 
as  yet  but  sparsely  inhabited.  Palestine,  as  a  whole,  was 
still  a  land  of  shepherds.  A  glance  at  the  contour  of  the 
country  will  show  how  the  cultural  development  which  was 
reached  in  the  days  of  Joshua  in  the  thirteenth  century 
was  so  long  delayed.  The  occupation  of  a  few  fertile 
districts,  with  perhaps  occasional  cultivation  of  the  soil, 
could  make  the  whole  country  neither  rich  nor  prosperous, 
and  Palestine  would  probably  never  have  become  the 
thickly  settled  land  which  it  was  in  its  flourishing  times 
if  it  had  not  been  for  the  proximity  of  more  advanced 
communities.  It  was  a  slow  process  to  learn  to  utilize 
the  rains  and  mountain  brooks  for  purposes  of  irrigation, 
and  to  make  the  countless  denuded  hills  vie  in  produc- 
tiveness with  the  valleys  below  (cf.  §  126). 

§  139.  Yet  it  would  in  all  likelihood  be  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  in  2000  B.C.  the  land  was  entirely  given  up  to 
flocks  and  herds,  to  shepherds  and  Bedawin.  The  rich 
Philistian  plain,  and  still  more  the  fertile  vale  of  Jezreel, 
were  doubtless  already  the  home  of  a  settled  population, 
and  the  necessities  of  supply  for  the  growing  agricultural 
communities  led  to  the  establishment  here  and  there  of 
villages  and  towns.  Moreover,  it  was  through  these 
districts  that  the  great  roads  of  traffic  ran,  and  the  most 
flourishing  of  these  rudimentary  cities  would  be  thx>;e 
which  were  the  halting-places  of  caravans  and  drovers.  In 
this  way  grew  up  the  towns  of  which  we  read  in  Egyptian 
and  cuneiform  Palestinian  documents  of  a  few  centuries 


168  DEVELOPMENT  OF  PHCEXICIA  BOOK  III 

later  (§  152),  and  whose  number  and  importance  at  that 
date  make  it  more  than  probable  that  many  of  them  were 
founded  before  2000  B.C.  To  the  localities  in  Central  and 
Southern  Palestine,  whose  names  occur  in  the  patriarchal 
history,  we  must  not  ascribe  any  very  great  importance. 
Yet  some  of  them  were  more  than  mere  sacred  shrines,  the 
gathering-places  for  the  worship  of  local  divinities.  For- 
tresses like  Jerusalem,  and  frontier  towns  like  Hebron  and 
Ziklag,  doubtless  served  in  this  early  time  as  rally  ing- 
places  and  cities  of  defence  for  the  tribes  of  the  Canaanites 
and  Amorites,  which  through  them  were  able  to  preserve 
their  autonomy  for  many  succeeding  centuries.  Most 
flourishing  of  all,  according  to  Gen.  xiii.,  xiv.,  xviii.,  and 
xix.,  were  the  cities  of  the  lower  Jordan  valley  (or  the 
Glior),  whose  luxurious  prosperity  was  checked  by  a  vol- 
canic upheaval  and  reverted  to  hopeless  desolation. 

§  140.  But  the  Canaanites  who  first  became  more  than 
locally  prominent  were  those  that  passed  over  the  ridges 
and  ravines  and  moved  upward  past  the  plain  of  Jezreel 
along  the  coast-land,  until  they  reached  the  district  which 
we  know  as  Phrenicia.  Here  the  chances  of  the  sea  made 
them  first  fishermen,  then  coasting  traders,  and  then  inven- 
tive mamifacturers.  For  the  products  of  their  industry 
they  found  an  ever-widening  market,  so  that  by  the  trade 
which  they  monopolized  they  reached  a  degree  of  prosperity 
and  enrichment  which  their  cattle-raising  and  spice-grow- 
ing brethren  could  never  hope  to  emulate.  Many  ages 
before  the  time  of  which  we  speak  they  had  ventured  out 
from  the  coast,  had  colonized  Cyprus,  and  ransacked  the 
whole  Eastern  Mediterranean  for  merchantable  commodi- 
ties and  materials  for  the  useful  arts.  The  main  impor- 
tance of  Phoenicia,  however,  for  the  world's  history  (§  66), 
like  that  of  Palestine,  was  as  yet  unattained.  Lebanon 
and  Anti-Lebanon  were  now  yielding  tribute  of  noble  firs 
and  cedars  to  the  merchants  and  ship-builders  of  Sidon  and 
the  monarchs  and  nobles  of  Babylonia.  The  long  stretch 
of  territory  between  Lebanon  and  the  Euphrates  was  as  yet 


CH.  II,  §141  INTERNATIONAL   HIGHWAYS  169 

uncontrolled  by  civilized  Hettites  or  Aramaeans;  but 
already  the  trading-posts  along  the  main  route  of  travel  and 
traffic  to  the  all-absorbing  East  were  developing  into  cities, 
chief  of  which  were  Damascus,  Hamath,  and  Carchemish. 
§  141.  It  may  not  be  inappropriate  at  this  point  to  trace 
in  a  general  way  the  highways  of  international  communi- 
cation, as  they  were  traversed  not  merely  in  the  times  we 
are  considering,  but  for  many  long  years  after.  The 
reader  may  also  find  it  useful  to  bear  them  in  mind  as 
serving  to  indicate  the  routes  of  armies,  ambassadors, 
couriers,  and  travellers.  There  were  two  great  lines  of 
traffic  towards  the  East,  which,  however,  were  united 
during  a  great  part  of  the  whole  course.  In  southwestern 
Palestine,  the  traders  returning  from  Eg}rpt  and  those  who 
came  from  Western  and  Southern  Arabia  took  the  coast- 
road  of  the  Philistian  plain,  and  crossing  the  country 
through  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  where  Megiddo  was  very 
early  an  important  station,  they  passed  over  Jordan  to 
Gilead,  where  the  trade  of  Eastern  Palestine  was  centred. 
Thence  the  road  led  to  Damascus,  the  greatest  emporium 
west  of  the  Euphrates  for  all  manufactures  and  agricultural 
products,  just  half-way  between  that  boundary  stream  and 
Northern  Egypt.  Here  the  road  led  due  north  to  Hamath 
on  the  Orontes.  At  Hamath  it  was  joined  by  the  other,  a 
much  shorter  but  very  important  route,  which  specially 
served  the  interest  of  Phoenicia,  above  all  of  Tyre,  whose 
supremacy  among  its  sister  seaports  must  largely  be 
ascribed  to  its  command  of  this  avenue  of  traffic  from  its 
very  beginning  at  the  sea.  Following  the  Leontes  upwards, 
this  road  traversed  the  fertile  valley  of  Ccelo-Syria;  then 
it  skirted  the  Orontes  in  its  downward  course,  till  at 
Hamath  it  was  merged  in  the  great  inter-continental  high- 
way. When  we  consider  the  enormous  timber  trade  of 
Lebanon,  both  with  the  East  and  with  the  West,  it  is 
natural  to  suppose  that  the  Leontes  carried  down  much  of 
this  material  that  was  in  requisition  at  Tyre,  and  that  the 
Orontes  conveyed  as  far  as  its  northwestern  bend  at  Hamath 


170  DEVELOPMENT  OF   PALESTINE  BOOK  III 

the  costly  woods  that  were  destined  for  the  architects  and 
cabinet-makers  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria.  From  Hamath 
the  main  caravan  route  was  followed  through  Aleppo  and 
Arpad  to  Carchemish,  on  the  western  bank  of  the  Eu- 
phrates. Crossing  the  River,  a  course  nearly  due  east  was 
taken.  The  principal  stop  in  this  main  section  was  made 
at  the  "Great  Road"  city,1  as  the  Babylonians  called  it, 
Charran,  the  central  meeting-place  of  cattle-dealers,  spice- 
traders,  jewellers,  merchants,  and  negotiators  of  all  sorts, 
and  of  all  tongues  and  nationalities,  from  north,  south, 
east,  and  west,  and  the  shrine  of  countless  religious  pil- 
grims. Further  eastward  still,  the  important  city  of 
Nisibis  was  passed;  and  when  Nineveh  was  reached  the 
route  was  practically  ended,  as  far  as  Assyrian  trade  with 
the  West  was  concerned.  But  the  commerce  of  Babylonia, 
which  was  plied  long  before  and  after  the  rise  and  fall  of 
Nineveh,  claimed  its  great  avenues  of  communication,  and 
of  these  the  Euphrates  route  was,  at  least  in  early  times, 
the  most  important  if  not  the  one  exclusively  employed. 
Later  also,  in  the  times  of  Assyrian  supremac}r,  it  had  to 
be  followed  in  any  case,  on  account  of  the  rivalry  of  the 
Ninevites  on  the  northeast.  It  should  be  added  that  the 
road  from  Damascus  through  Tadmor  to  the  Euphrates, 
was  in  these  early  times  as  yet  undeveloped  (cf.  1  K.  ix. 
18 ;  2  Chr.  viii.  4),  and  that  at  no  time  did  it  attain  to  the 
importance  of  the  main  route  over  Carchemish. 

§  142.  For  the  next  period,  which  reaches  to  the  Hettite 
occupation  of  Syria  (fourteenth  century),  we  have  much 
fuller  and,  in  some  instances,  quite  novel  and  surprising 
sources  of  information  (§  151  ff.).  During  the  centuries 
thus  embraced,  Palestine  underwent  a  gradual  but  very 
substantial  development.  The  cities  and  fortresses,  the 
conditions  of  whose  establishments  have  been  noted  above 
(§  139  f.),  became,  in  accordance  with  the  genius  of  the 

1  The  ideogram  for  Charran  (harranu,  p}H,  Xappac)  is  the  same  as  that 
which  signifies  "  highway."  For  the  region  see  §  75. 


CH.  II,  §  14-]          EGYPT   REPLACES   BABYLONIA  171 

people  (§  37),  the  centres  of  a  large  number  of  independent 
principalities,  disinclined  to  and  usually  incapable  of 
confederation,  and  offering  a  tempting  and  easy  prey  to 
the  stronger  united  monarchies  of  the  East  and  West. 
The  religion  and  ordinary  elements  of  culture  of  these 
communities  were  naturally  Canaanitic;  but  their  higher 
intellectual  development  was  throughout  the  whole  period 
distinctively  and  perhaps  exclusively  due  to  Babylonia. 
The  foundations  of  Babylonian  influence  and  culture  must 
have  been  laid  deep  and  strong  during  the  dynasties  of 
native  princes,  and  a  close  communication,  both  commer- 
cial and  diplomatic,  must  have  been  maintained  during  the 
earlier  years  of  the  Kasshite  regime  (§  121  ff.).  Other- 
wise the  prevalence  of  Babylonian  language  and  writing 
in  the  fifteenth  century  (§  154)  would  be  entirely  inexpli- 
cable. Yet  it  is  equally  certain  that,  at  least  from  the 
sixteenth  century  onwards,  the  power  of  Babylonia  in  the 
West  was  steadily  waning,  and  since  the  petty  states  of 
Palestine  were  without  cohesion  or  collective  strength  they 
fell  into  the  hands  of  Egypt,  which  now  for  a  time  assumed 
the  place  of  predominance  once  occupied  by  the  empire  of 
the  Euphrates. 

§  143.  The  rule  of  the  Shepherd  Princes  in  Egypt  was 
brought  to  an  end  early  in  the  sixteenth  century,  after 
a  prolonged  struggle  with  the  reviving  monarchy  of 
Thebes.  The  rejuvenation  of  the  empire,  due  to  the 
revival  of  the  national  spirit  which  followed  the  abolition 
of  the  foreign  rdgime,  was  marked  most  distinctively  by 
a  new  attitude  towards  the  states  of  Western  Asia.  For- 
merly Egypt  had  been  the  sufferer  from  Asiatic  aggressors ; 
henceforth  it  became  her  policy  to  claim  an  interest  in 
Palestine  and  Syria,  and  to  assert  the  claim  by  armed 
invasion  whenever  her  resources  seemed  to  justify  the 
effort.  This  change  of  sentiment  and  aim  was  no  doubt 

o 

partly  due  to  a  reawakened  lust  of  conquest  and  power, 
the  reaction  from  the  pressure  of  a  foreign  yoke.  But  the 
rulers  of  the  Nile  Valley  had  deeper  motives  and  a  further- 


172  AGGRESSIVE   POLICY   OF  EGYPT  BOOK  III 

reaching  purpose  than  the  impulses  of  mere  self-assertion. 
They  not  only  dreaded  a  repetition  of  incursions  on  the 
part  of  the  wild  nomads  who  had  almost  robbed  Egypt  of 
her  nationality  and  religion;  but  they  knew  also  that 
behind  these  Semitic  barbarians  there  was  an  empire  with 
a  civilization  equal  to  their  own  in  antiquity  and  virility, 
with  a  political  system  more  manageable  and  coherent,  by 
virtue  of  which  Babylonia  had  already  brought  the  fairest 
portions  of  Asia  under  control,  and  they  felt  that  the 
possession  of  Palestine  and  Syria  would  not  merely  secure 
them  against  the  return  of  the  "  Shepherds,"  but  serve  them 
also  as  the  very  best  possible  vantage-ground  for  offensive 
or  defensive  warfare  against  their  inevitable  and  permanent 
rivals.  They  thus  made  it  their  constant  aim  to  push  their 
frontier  as  far  eastward  as  possible,  and  to  convert  the 
strongholds  of  their  uncertain  and  dangerous  neighbours 
into  fortresses  for  their  own  protection.  The  control  or 
chief  profit  of  the  trade  of  Phoenicia  and  Syria  was,  of 
course,  also  included  in  their  plans. 

§  144.  Egypt  was  delivered  from  the  tjTanny  of  the 
Hyksos  by  Aahmes  I,  the  first  king  of  the  Eighteenth 
Dynasty  (c.  1580  B.C.).  After  driving  the  Asiatic  allies 
of  the  usurping  immigrants  over  the  Isthmus,  the  advan- 
tage was  followed  up  by  a  formal  invasion  of  Palestine. 
Sharuhen,  mentioned  in  Josh.  xix.  6  as  among  the  frontier 
towns  of  Southwest  Canaan,  and  at  this  earlier  date  one 
of  the  principal  fortresses  of  Palestine,  submitted  to  the 
Egyptians,  who  proceeded  thence  to  an  attack  upon  Phoe- 
nicia, where  they  apparently  met  with  little  substantial 
resistance.  This  inroad,  however,  did  not  result  at  once 
in  permanent  occupation.  It  rather  prepared  the  way  for 
a  subsequent  course  of  conquest  and  annexation.  "This 
Asiatic  campaign  had  shown  the  Egyptians  the  way  into 
Asia.  The  wars  had  also  trained  generals  and  armies,  and 
Aahmes'  successors  saw  to  it  that  neither  deteriorated. 
A  new  spirit  had  come  over  the  once  peaceful  people,  and 
army  after  army  set  out  on  warlike  expeditions.  Amon 


CH.  II,  §  145  INVASION  OF   MESOPOTAMIA  173 

and  Mentu,  the  great  gods  of  Thebes,  became  war-gods,  in 
whose  names  the  kings  fought  their  wars;  and  into  the 
temple  of  Amon  poured  the  lion's  share  of  the  booty  won 
in  war  and  the  tribute  wrung  from  conquered  nations. 
The  entire  character  of  the  wrars,  too,  was  changed  by  the 
introduction  of  the  horse  from  Asia.  The  home  of  the  horse 
was  most  probably  the  Turanian  steppe.  It  was  introduced 
into  Egypt  by  the  Hyksos.  Horses  were  not  used  at  this 
time  as  beasts  of  burden,  but  only  in  war  and  on  the  chase. 
They  were  not  used  in  riding,  but  only  to  draw  the  two- 
wheeled  chariots.  These  chariots  were  imported  into  Egypt 
from  Syria,  where  chariot-building  was  a  flourishing  indus- 
try. l  The  very  word  for  chariot  —  merkabet  —  is  of  Semitic 
origin.  This  new  arm  entirely  changed  the  character  and 
dimensions  of  battles.  Moreover,  chariots  and  horses  were 
expensive,  and  the  charioteer  required  special  training. 
These  two  circumstances  favoured  the  formation  of  stand- 
ing armies  and  increased  the  advantage  the  greater  states 
had  over  their  smaller  neighbours.  These  facts  will 
account  for  the  successes  the  Egyptians  won  over  the 
Syrian  states  in  the  ensuing  campaigns."2 

§  145.  The  second  king  after  Aalimes,  Thothmes  I,  led 
a  regular  expedition  through  Palestine  and  Syria.  The 
objective  point  of  his  march  was  Mesopotamia,  the  meeting- 
place  of  all  the  great  routes  of  traffic  (§  141).  In  his 
successful  progress  as  an  invader  of  these  regions  he 
crossed  the  Euphrates,  and  as  being  the  first  of  the 
Pharaohs  to  accomplish  this  feat,  he  erected  a  commemora- 
tive tablet  east  of  the  River,  which  at  the  same  time  was 
to  indicate  the  extent  of  the  Egyptian  dominions.  These 
incursions,  brilliant  as  was  their  success,  were,  however, 
little  more  than  forays,  with  plunder  as  their  chief  aim  and 
result.  Tribute  was,  of  course,  imposed  upon  the  con- 
quered peoples,  but  as  no  army  of  occupation  was  left  to 

1  Cf .  Josh.  xi.  4  for  Northern  Palestine. 

2  "Wendel,  History  of  Egypt  (History  Primers),  p.  07. 


174  SYSTEMATIC    CAMPAIGNS   IN   SYRIA          BOOK  III 

secure  the  fruits  of  the  conquest,  the  compulsory  loyalty 
of  the  new  Egyptian  subjects  vanished  with  the  disappear- 
ance of  the  invaders.  The  daughter  and  second  successor 
of  Thothmes  I,  an  enterprising  and  ambitious  queen  named 
Ma-ka-Ra,  signalized  her  reign  chiefly  by  a  large  maritime 
commercial  expedition  to  Southern  Arabia,  which  returned 
with  an  immense  freight  of  the  products  of  "Punt,"  or 
Sheba,  chief  among  which  were  spices,  incense,  gold, 
ivory,  and  curious  animals.  She  does  not  seem  to  have 
interfered  by  force  in  the  affairs  of  Asia.  Her  half-brother 
and  successor,  Thothmes  III  (c.  1520),  who  enjoyed  a 
long  reign,  was  the  greatest  of  Egyptian  conquerors.  He 
was  the  first  who  really  made  determined  and  systematic 
efforts  for  the  subjugation  of  Syria.  The  sense  of  danger 
awakened  by  experience  of  the  new  Egyptian  policy  had 
already  led  to  an  alliance  of  the  various  communities  south 
of  Hamath,  at  the  head  of  which  was  apparently  the  king 
of  Kadesh  on  the  Orontes,  and  when  Thothmes  appeared 
in  Northern  Palestine  their  combined  forces  confronted 
him  at  Megiddo.  Here  was  fought  the  first  on  record  of 
those  countless  battles  which  have  made  famous  that 
meeting-place  of  armies,  and  through  which  it  came  to  be 
so  appropriately  typical  of  the  horrors  and  desolations  of 
war  (Rev.  xvi.  16).  The  invaders  were  victorious,  and 
the  whole  of  Syria  and  Palestine  acknowledged  the  Egyp- 
tian rule.  What  is  specially  noteworthy  is  the  further 
fact  that  the  king  of  Assyria  (§  173)  sent  to  the  conqueror 
valuable  propitiatory  gifts,  he,  of  course,  as  well  as  the 
princes  of  Babylonia,  being  now  completely  ruled  out  of 
the  West-land.  The  rest  of  the  fifteen  Asiatic  campaigns 
of  the  same  monarch  had  most  frequently  for  their  object 
the  putting  down  of  insurrections.  This  task  was  the 
order  of  the  day  during  the  whole  of  the  regime  of  the 
Pharaohs  in  Asia,  on  account  of  their  lack  of  organizing 
faculty  in  the  government  of  conquered  lands,  and  also 
because  the  subject  states  (or  rather  cities,  with  their 
surrounding  districts,  §  38)  were  so  heterogeneous  and 


CH.  II,  §  140     CLIMAX  OF  EGYPTIAN   GREATNESS  175 

scattered.  Thothmes,  however,  succeeded  also  in  extend- 
ing his  possessions  materially,  not  only  gaining  Carche- 
mish,  the  Hettite  capital,  but  a  long  strip  of  country 
besides  in  Naharain,  or  Mesopotamia,  up  and  down  the 
Euphrates.  Perhaps  more  important  and  more  profitable 
acquisition  was  made  in  securing  the  control  of  the  Phoe- 
nician coastland,  its  thriving  seaport  towns,  including 
Arvad,  Byblos,  and  Tyre,  and  its  colonies  in  Cyprus.  All 
of  these  yielded  substantial  addition  to  the  royal  treasuries 
and  the  priestly  endowments.  The  wealth  of  the  state, 
augmented  besides  by  costly  wares  and  precious  metals 
from  Nubia  and  South  Arabia,  thus  became  great  beyond 
example.  Not  the  least  important  of  the  acquisitions  of 
Thothmes  III  in  Syria  was  the  daughter  of  the  king  of  the 
Rutenu,  who  became  one  of  his  queens.  This  simple  and 
obvious  method  of  cementing  alliances  seems  to  have  been 
the  highest  achievement  of  Egyptian  diplomacy  in  Asia. 
It  became  the  favourite  practice  of  his  successors,  and 
formed  the  subject  of  frequent  and  often  prolonged  nego- 
tiations (cf.  §  149  f.).  Of  little  permanent  consequence 
were  the  attempts  made  to  establish  the  worship  of  Egyp- 
tian deities  in  various  parts  of  the  country,  although  at 
Tunip,  a  region  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Damascus,  the 
cult  of  Amen  seems  to  have  been  kept  up  for  a  generation 
or  more.  The  two  immediate  successors  of  this  enterpris- 
ing monarch  succeeded,  by  dint  of  frequent  expeditions 
and  harsh  treatment  of  rebels,  in  keeping  the  conquered 
territory  in  tolerable  subjection.  Their  reigns  were  short, 
lasting  together  not  more  than  twenty  years,  and  with  the 
accession  of  the  next  in  order,  Amenophis  III  (c.  1450), 
we  come  to  the  turning-point  in  the  history  of  Egyptian 
influence  in  Asia. 

§  146.  In  the  introduction  to  this  work  (§  11)  occasion 
was  taken  to  remark  that  the  annals  of  the  Semitic  histori- 
ographers give  us  only  a  very  general  and  inadequate 
picture  of  the  real  history  and  complexion  of  the  times  and 
events  which  they  commemorate.  The  observation  may 


170  SUDDEN   LIGHT   ON   ORIENTAL   HISTORY      BOOK  III 

be  made  still  more  emphatically  of  the  Egyptian  court 
documents,  which  by  courtesy  are  called  historical.  For 
example,  the  adventures  of  all  the  Pharaohs  in  Asia  are 
recorded  in  the  same  stereotyped  fashion,  each  of  their 
expeditions  being  represented  as  a  sort  of  triumphal  pro- 
cession, the  invincible  monarch  doing  everything  in  a 
large,  irresistible,  heroic  fashion  that  precludes  the  variety 
and  detail  of  circumstantial  action,  which  give  life  and 
interest  to  all  real  historical  narration.  The  quelling  of 
stubborn  insurrections,  a  drawn  or  more  than  doubtful 
battle,  a  foray  for  plunder  or  provision  among  defenceless 
villages,  or  a  hunting  excursion  in  the  North  Syrian 
forests,  are  all  duly  recorded  and  vaunted  as  glorious 
triumphs  and  conquests.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  hold  of 
Egypt  upon  Asia,  which  was  never  very  sure,  was  steadily 
relaxing  after  the  time  of  the  great  Thothmes  III,  though 
one  would  never  have  learned  this  from  the  records  of  the 
kings,  which  are,  to  be  sure,  quite  meagre,  and  yet  have 
nothing  to  report  but  unbroken  success.  We  know  how 
valuable  for  the  purposes  of  historical  research  in  any  age 
are  even  a  few  specimens  of  contemporary  correspondence. 
Such  a  desideratum  has  been  supplied  in  the  most  satis- 
factory manner  by  the  now  famous  collection  of  letters 
written  upon  the  so-called  Tell  el  Amarna  tablets.  These 
letters  are  worthy  of  the  serious  attention  of  all  students 
of  history,  because  they  introduce  us  at  once  to  the  affairs 
of  the  most  important  peoples  of  the  second  millennium 
before  the  Christian  era,  and  light  up  for  us  as  by  a  single 
electric  flash  the  obscurity  which  has  hitherto  enveloped 
the  century  in  which  they  were  composed. 

§  147.  As  far  as  Egypt  alone  is  concerned,  it  is  the 
reigns  of  Amenophis  III  and  his  son  and  successor, 
Amenophis  IV,  that  are  illustrated  by  the  discovery. 
The  latter  (c.  1415  B.C.)  was,  in  religious  matters  at  least, 
the  most  remarkable  of  all  the  Egyptian  kings,  in  that  he 
formally  cast  oft'  the  prevailing  worship  of  Amen,  the 
supreme  deity  of  the  whole  Theban  regime,  and  undertook 


CH.  II,  §  148     THE   REFORMING   KING   OF   EGYPT  177 

to  revolutionize  the  faith  of  the  empire  by  exalting  to 
exclusive  honour  Aten,  the  god  of  the  sun-disk.  In  other 
words,  he  aimed  to  establish  solar  monotheism  as  the 
national  religion.  For  this  purpose  he  changed  his  name, 
the  first  portion  of  which  was  the  name  of  the  discarded 
deity,  to  Chu-en-Aten,  "the  lustre  of  the  solar  disk." 
Further,  and  what  was  of  more  importance,  he  removed 
the  royal  residence  from  Thebes,  the  capital  of  his  dynasty, 
the  sacred  city  of  Amen,  to  a  site  almost  exactly  half-way 
between  it  and  the  ancient  capital  Memphis.  Hither  he 
brought  the  royal  treasures  and  archives,  and  here  he  began 
the  erection  of  a  new  and  magnificent  temple,  which  should 
be  the  centre  and  shrine  of  the  new  worship.  Hand  in 
hand  with  his  efforts  to  advance  the  exclusive  claims  and 
prerogatives  of  the  Sun-god,  went  on  the  suppression  of 
the  traditional  faith  and  its  observances,  the  destruction 
or  defacement  of  the  temples  and  monuments  which  were 
their  outward  symbols  and  embodiments,  and  the  oblitera- 
tion of  the  inscriptions  and  sacred  books  which  served  for 
their  authentication  and  regulation.  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  motives  of  the  reforming  king  were  pure 
and  his  views  enlightened  and  profound,  though  we  have 
no  knowledge  of  the  details  of  his  belief  or  his  work.  His 
attempt  was  a  splendid  failure.  He  had  not  even  time  to 
bring  to  completion  outward  measures  for  the  establish- 
ment and  propagation  of  his  monotheistic  conceptions. 
His  reign  of  about  twelve  years  and  his  life  were  probably 
brought  to  an  end  by  a  revolt  against  his  too  thorough- 
going and  uncompromising  propagandism,  and  as  lie  left 
no  son  to  vindicate  his  cause  and  to  adjust  the  disturbed 
affairs  of  the  empire,  a  period  of  anarchy  was  the  inevitable 
and  melancholy  sequel  of  his  death. 

§  148.  What  further  interests  us  in  connection  with 
the  ill-fated  reformer,  the  "heretic  "  king  Chu-en-Aten,  has 
to  do  with  the  city  which  he  made  his  brief  capital.1  Its 

1  An  interestinii  sketch  of  Tell  el  Aniarna  by  Mr.  W.  S.  Boscawen,  may 
be  found  in  the  Independent,  July  27,  1893. 


178  EL   AMARXA   TABLETS  BOOK  III 

ruins  lie  near  the  modern  village  of  Tell  el  Amarna, 
on  the  right  bank  of  the  Nile,  in  north  latitude  about 
27|°.  In  the  year  1888  there  were  found  among  them 
by  a  peasant  woman,  who  was  seeking  antiquities  for  pur- 
poses of  sale,  a  number  of  tablets  written  in  cuneiform 
characters.  Continued  search  led  to  the  unearthing  of 
nearly  320  documents  complete  or  fragmentary.  Of  these 
about  two-thirds  found  their  way  to  the  Royal  Museum  at 
Berlin  and  to  the  British  Museum,  while  the  greater  part 
of  the  remainder  were  retained  in  the  Museum  at  Bulak  in 
Egypt.  The  mere  fact  of  the  existence  of  cuneiform  docu- 
ments in  Middle  Eg}^pt  was  a  notable  surprise;  but  this 
was  greatly  augmented  when  it  appeared  upon  examination 
that  they  consisted  of  letters,  mostly  written  in  the  Baby- 
lonian language  in  the  fifteenth  century  B.C.,  from  rulers 
or  officials  of  several  Asiatic  countries  to  King  Amenophis 
III  and  his  successor,  Amenophis  IV,  or  Chu-en-Aten, 
and  persons  connected  with  their  courts.  Those  belonging 
to  the  reign  of  the  former  king  had  been,  of  course,  brought 
from  Thebes  to  the  new  religious  capital  in  the  general 
deportation  above  alluded  to.  The  contents  of  the  docu- 
ments show  them  to  harve  consisted  of  diplomatic  messages, 
business  and  friendly  communications,  and  reports  as  to 
the  affairs  of  subject  states.  They  proceed  from  Babylonia, 
then  under  the  Kasshite  regime  (§  123) ;  from  Assyria, 
then  beginning  to  cherish  extensive  political  designs 
(§  173) ;  from  Mesopotamia,  then  partly  under  a  non- 
Semitic  government ;  and  from  Egyptian  prefects  or  depu- 
ties in  the  dependent  districts  of  Syria  and  Palestine. 
Naturally,  the  last-named  collection  will  have  for  us  the 
deepest  interest,  but  the  significance  of  each  of  the  other 
groups  should  also  be  briefly  indicated,  and  then  it  will  be 
in  place  to  draw  one  or  two  general  conclusions.1 

1  Much  has  already  been  done,  and  that  by  competent  men,  for  the 
pxiblication  and  interpretation  of  these  difficult  inscriptions.  The  two 
chief  collections  have  already  been  published  in  careful  editions  of  the 
texts,  that  of  the  Berlin  Museum  by  Winckler  and  Abel  (see  ZA.  VI, 


CH.  II,  §  149     LETTERS  BETWEEN  BABYLON  AND  EGYPT      179 

§  149.  The  correspondence  between  Egypt  and  Baby- 
lonia is  more  valuable  for  what  it  suggests  than  for  what 
it  directly  discloses.  It  consists  of  eleven  letters:  one 
from  Amenophis  III  to  Kallima-Sin,  king  of  Babylonia; 
three  from  the  latter  to  the  former;  seven  from  Burra- 
buriash,  king  of  Babylonia  (c.  1440-1405,  cf.  §  175)  to 
Amenophis  IV  of  Egypt.  The  principal  subjects  dis- 
cussed are  intermarriages  between  the  one  court  and  the 
other.  Amenophis  III,  who  had  already  married  the 
sister  of  the  Babylonian  king,  is  anxious  also  to  secure  his 
daughter.  Her  father,  however,  hesitates  diplomatically, 
on  the  ground  that  he  has  not  been  able  to  find  out  how  his 
sister  has  been  treated  since  she  allied  herself  to  the 
Egyptian  royal  house.  There  is  a  great  deal  of  discussion 
upon  this  delicate  point,  but  after  a  time  the  Babylonian 
tells  the  Egyptian  that  his  daughter  being  now  old  enough 
to  marry,  she  is  at  his  disposal.  There  had  been  several 
intermarriages  011  both  sides  involving,  as  we  may  infer 
from  this  specimen,  a  vast  amount  of  negotiation.  The 

141;  VII,  121  ff.),  Der  Thontafelfund  von  El-Amarna,  Berlin,  1890; 
that  of  the  British  Museum  by  Bezold,  with  Introduction  by  Bezokl  and 
Budge  (the  original  purchaser  of  the  tablets),  London,  1892.  In  Oriental 
Diplomacy,  London,  1893,  Bezold  gives  a  transcription  of  the  texts,  with 
vocabulary  and  notes.  The  Berlin  edition  contains  also  copies  of  inscrip- 
tions in  the  Museum  at  Bulak,  so  that  the  whole  find  is  now  virtually 
before  the  public  in  a  reliable  form.  Portions  of  the  texts  have  already 
been  translated  and  explained,  notably  in  the  masterly  articles  by 
Zimmern,  Briefe  aus  dem  Funcle  in  El-Amarna,  and,  Die  Keilschrift- 
briefe  aus  Jerusalem,  ZA.  V,  137-165 ;  VI,  245-203.  See  also  Budge  in 
PSBA.  X,  540-569,  and  Sayce,  ibid.  X,  488-525;  XI,  326-413,  the  last- 
named  essay  dealing  with  the  Bulak  tablets.  Of  the  numerous  more  or 
less  popular  articles,  special  attention  may  be  called  to  Zimmern's  inau- 
gural dissertation  at  Halle,  Palastina  um  das  Jahr  1400  v.  Chr.  nach 
neuen  Quellen  (Zeitschrift  des  di'ntschen  Palastina- Vereins,  XIII,  133- 
147),  of  which  an  abstract  was  furnished  in  the  Independent,  July  16, 1891, 
and  the  Mayazine  of  Christian  Literature,  February,  1892  ;  Lehmann, 
Aus  dem  Funde  von  Tell  el  Ainarna,  ZA.  Ill,  372-406  (comprehensive 
and  suggestive)  ;  and  for  Egypt  and  Syria  a  brilliant  resume1  by  Sayce  in 
Sunday  School  Times,  Jan.  23,  1892.  A  complete  bibliography  up  to 
date  appeared  in  the  Introduction  to  the  British  Museum  texts  mentioned 
above. 


180  SUBJECTS   OF   NEGOTIATION  BOOK  III 

leading  motive  both  of  the  proposals  and  the  delays  was,  of 
course,  on  both  sides,  the  desire  to  secure  as  large  a  dowry 
as  possible  and  other  accompanying  gifts,  since  presents, 
sometimes  up  to  a  specified  amount,  are  openly  demanded. 
But  larger  affairs  of  state  than  these  really  depended  on 
the  success  of  the  negotiations.  Aside  from  the  main 
consideration  that  the  two  empires  at  the  limits  of  the 
civilized  world  should  be  on  a  footing  of  amity,  and  so 
preserve  international  peace  generally,  incidental  advan- 
tages were  gained,  such  as  treaties  of  commerce  and 
conventions  as  to  customs,  duties,  and  other  levies  made 
upon  merchants  of  the  one  country  trading  in  the  other. 
The  letters  of  Burraburiash,  while  also  looking  well  after 
the  main  chance,  give  incidental  information  of  value. 
For  example,  in  one  of  them  the  Babylonian  king  reminds 
the  Egyptian  that  his  father,  Kurigalzu,  had  refused  to 
join  in  an  invasion  of  Egypt  planned  by  certain  Palestinian 
marauders,  on  the  ground  of  the  league  between  them,  and 
had  even  notified  the  disturbers  l  that  he  would  make  war 
on  any  king  who  would  join  them  in  attacking  the  king  of 
Egypt,  "his  brother."  Thus  we  see  that  an  offensive 
alliance  between  these  widely  separated  nations  was  at 
least  a  matter  of  profession. 

§  150.  Letters  from  two  kings  of  Assyria,  also  to 
Amenophis  IV  (cf.  §  175),  reveal  the  strenuous  efforts 
made  by  the  rising  rival  of  Babylonia  to  secure  the  favour 
of  Egypt  with  gifts,  and  the  establishing  of  confidential 
relations  generally.  Of  special  interest  to  us  are  also  the 
letters  that  come  from  the  region  of  Western  Mesopotamia, 
inasmuch  as  they  set  before  us  most  fully  the  social  rela- 
tions of  the  monarchs  of  the  time,  and  furnish  much 
incidental  information  as  to  matters  of  trade  and  politics. 
The  name  of  the  country  thus  associated  with  Egypt  was 
MitFuri,  a  region  apparently  comprising  most  of  Naharain 
(£  To)  and  the  southern  portion  of  Cappadocia  or  Kom- 

1  Br.  M.  collection,  Nr.  2  ;  see  Introd.,  p.  xxx  f. 


CH.  II,  §  150       ASSYRIA,    MESOPOTAMIA   AND   EGYPT  181 

magene.1  The  people  of  this  country,  or  at  least  its 
governing  class,  appear  not  to  have  been  of  Semitic  stock, 
since  one  of  the  El  Amarna  letters  from  this  source  is 
written  in  a  non-Semitic  language.2  Yet,  like  the  rest  of 
the  Western  Asiatics,  they  availed  themselves  usually  of 
the  well-known  language  of  general  intercourse,  the  world- 
compelling  Babylonian.  The  political  significance  of  the 
communications  between  this  region  and  Egypt  will  be 
apparent  when  it  is  remembered  that  Thothmes  III  (§  145) 
had  not  only  pushed  his  conquest  to  the  Euphrates,  but  had 
acquired  a  strip  of  territory  on  its  eastern  bank.  The 
kings  of  Alitani  who  reigned  after  his  time  were  strong 
enough  to  secure  the  whole  of  the  eastern  side  of  the 
River,  and  to  the  less  powerful  successors  of  the  great 
conqueror  it  seemed  the  best  policy  to  cultivate  their 
friendship,  as  a  protection  for  their  own  precarious  posses- 
sions in  Syria,  and  as  a  general  barrier  to  movements 
unfriendly  to  Egypt  on  the  part  of  any  of  the  neighbours 
of  the  centrally  situated  Mesopotamian  monarchy.  The 
importance  of  these  political  relations  had  already  been 
vaguely  known  to  Egyptologists.  Thi,  the  beautiful  and 
beloved  queen  or  chief  wife  of  Amenophis  IV,  appears 
from  her  physiognomy  and  complexion  as  exhibited  in 
her  mummy,  to  have  been  a  native  of  Northeastern  Syria, 
and  a  scarab  inscription  tells  that  another  consort  came 
to  him  from  Naharain,  the  daughter  of  King  Satarna, 
with  317  ladies  in  her  train.  Now  Dushratta,  the  author 
of  the  letters  in  this  group,  correspondent  of  Ameno- 
phis III,  was  the  brother  of  the  latter  Mesopotamian 
princess,  and  we  learn  from  him  that  not  only  his  sister, 
but  his  daughter  also,  changed  her  nationality  and  her 

1  See   particularly  Lehmann   in    ZA.    Ill,  377  ;   Jensen,  ibid.  VI,  57 
ff.,  342  ff.  ;  Introd.  to  Br.  M.  collection,  p.  xxxvii ;  Winckler,   Oriental- 
ische  Forschunyen,  p.  86  f. 

2  Attempts  to  read  and  interpret  the  language  in  question  have  been 
made,  notably  by  Sayce,  Briinnow,  and  Jensen.    See  articles  by  all  three 
in  ZA.  V,  160-274,  and  one  by  Jensen,  ibid.  VI,  34-72. 


182  LETTEKS  FROM  SYRIA  AND  PALESTINE         BOOK  III 

faith  in  the  cause  of  matrimonial  diplomacy.  The  pro- 
fuseness  of  verbiage,  the  effusiveness  of  compliment,  and 
the  skill  in  suggesting  "better  terms,"  which  are  the 
most  marked  characteristics  of  the  venerable  documents 
that  relate  to  these  and  other  matters  of  grave  common 
concern,  entitle  them  to  no  insignificant  place  among  the 
extant  state  papers  of  the  ancient  world.1 

§  151.  The  next  series  of  letters,  the  most  numerous 
and  interesting  of  the  groups,  brings  us  more  directly  in 
contact  with  the  events  of  the  time.  I  mean  the  docu- 
ments containing  messages  to  the  Egyptian  suzerain,  from 
his  viceroys  and  captains  in  Syria  and  Palestine.  The 
letters  already  dealt  with  may  be  regarded,  from  our  point 
of  view,  as  preparatory  to  them.  Those  indicated  the 
importance  of  Asiatic  alliances  to  the  rulers  of  the  Nile ; 
these  show  in  detail  how  the  Egyptian  interests  there  were 
declining  in  spite  of  diplomacy  and  the  prestige  of  former 
conquests.  They  belong  almost  entirely  to  the  time  of 
Amenophis  IV.  In  his  reign  the  hold  of  the  Pharaohs 
upon  Asia,  which  had  been  relaxed  under  the  compromis- 
ing policy  of  his  predecessor,  became  loosened  and  in 
great  part  shaken  off.  The  exclusive  devotion  to  his 
religious  reforms,  which  made  the  reign  of  the  heretic 
king  politically  unsuccessful  at  home,  led  to  disaster 
and  humiliation  abroad.  Garrisons  and  outposts  were 
neglected,  and  their  commanders  left  without  reinforce- 
ments or  supplies.  Rival  nationalities,  and  even  maraud- 
ing tribes  and  clans,  were  permitted  to  plot  against  and 
invade  the  provinces  and  besiege  their  cities  without 
serious  opposition ;  and  the  obliteration  of  both  the  name 
and  the  substance  of  Egyptian  authority  in  Asia  was  only 
delayed  because  the  disturbing  forces,  though  numerous, 

1  It  should  be  added,  as  a  very  significant  fact,  that  the  language  of 
these  letters,  though  not  the  vernacular  of  either  of  the  correspondents, 
is  a  pure  and  copious  Babylonian.  The  Mitani  tablets  are  distinguished 
from  the  others  externally,  by  being  made  of  the  dark  red  clay  which  is 
met  with  in  the  north  of  Syria  and  the  adjacent  region. 


CH.  II,  §  152  CLASSICAL  LOCALITIES  183 

were    individually   weak,    and   for   a   time    quite    insig- 
nificant. 

§  152.  The  localities  from  which  these  letters  are  dated 
are,  in  most  instances,  familiar  to  classical  and  Biblical 
students ;  and  the  reader  finds  it  at  first  difficult  to  realize 
that  the  events  and  interests  are  those  of  a  time  as  remote 
as  the  fifteenth  century  B.C.  From  Egyptian  sources  it 
was  already  known  that  Gaza,  Arvad,  Megiddo,  and  a  few 
other  less-known  cities,  had  been  subdued  by  the  Pharaohs 
(cf.  §  145).  The  El  Amarna  collection  contains  official 
letters  from  Byblos  (Gebal),  Tyre,  Beyrut,  Accho,  Hazor, 
Gezer,  Askalon,  and  Jerusalem,  while  other  familiar  names, 
such  as  Sidon,  Joppa,  and  Lachish,  are  referred  to  in  the 
same  documents.  For  detailed  information  as  to  their 
contents,  I  must  refer  to  the  special  treatises  already 
mentioned  (§  148,  n.).  The  most  interesting  facts  may  be 
stated  as  follows.  Of  the  strongholds  of  Egyptian  author- 
ity, those  in  the  north  were  in  the  greatest  danger.  In 
fact,  Northern  Syria  may  be  regarded  as  lost  to  Egypt. 
Byblos,  Tyre,  and  Beyrut  are  being  held  with  difficulty  by 
the  governors  who,  in  profession  at  least,  are  loyal,  at  great 
cost  and  in  spite  of  great  difficulties.  The  troubles  come 
from  three  separate  sources.  From  without,  the  Hettites 
are  pressing  southwards  from  their  vantage-grounds  lately 
secured  in  Northern  Syria.  Next,  in  their  interest  an 
obscure  foe  of  Canaanitish  race,  under  the  leadership  of  a 
certain  rebellious  plotter,  Abdashera1  (Abdi-Asirti),  is 
gradually  seizing  the  outlying  towns.  Finally,  there  is 
dissension  and  rivalry  among  the  Egyptian  governors 
themselves,  and  they  accuse  one  another  to  the  king  of 
disloyalty,  each  crediting  his  colleagues  with  the  blame  of 
the  loss  of  cities  and  the  lowering  of  the  standard  of  the 
Pharaohs.  The  burden  of  the  letters  is  the  need  of  succour 

1  The  occurrence  of  the  name  in  this  combination,  "Servant  of 
Ashera,"  has  been  rightly  claimed  as  evidence,  by  Sayce  and  others, 
that  the  much-disputed  mE7K  was  really  a  Canaanitish  goddess.  The 
word  is,  of  course,  also  used  in  OT.  for  the  symbol  of  the  divinity  (§  321). 


184  LOSS   OF   EGYPTIAN  POSSESSIONS  BOOK  III 

for  the  hard-pressed  garrisons,  with  the  reiterated  entreaty 
that  relief  may  be  speedily  sent.  The  names  of  the 
governors  who  appeal  most  frequently  and  insistently  are 
worth  noting:  Rib-Addi  (Hadad,  i.e.  Rimmon),  viceroy 
of  Byblos,  and  Abi-milki  (  =  Abimelech),  viceroy  of  Tyre. 
From  Jerusalem  came  six  letters,1  full  of  suggestion  as  to 
the  history  of  Southern  Canaan.  They  are  written  by  the 
native  governor  of  Jerusalem  (  Urusalim)  named  Abdi-tdba, 
and  abound  with  bitter  complaints  against  the  unfaithful- 
ness of  certain  conspirators,  his  neighbours,  who  are  hand- 
ing over  the  whole  of  the  country  to  the  ffabire,  the  most 
dangerous  foe  in  that  part  of  Palestine.  These  Chabire 
are  possibly  the  people  of  Hebron,  one  of  the  old  Amorite 
cities,  which  was  now  seeking  to  become  the  centre  of  a 
new  monarchy  in  Southern  Palestine  independent  of  the 
alien  Egyptians.  One  of  the  letters  tells  of  the  loss  of 
the  cities  of  Gezer,  Gath,  Keilah,  with  others  not  yet  fully 
identified,  and  a  letter  2  from  an  unknown  city,  written  by 
a  certain  Mut-Adda  ("man  or  servant  of  Hadad"  —  Rim- 
mon), tells  further  of  the  rebellion  of  Edom,  Addar  (Josh, 
xv.  3),  and  Magdiel  (Gen.  xxxvi.  43),  and  other  districts 
hitherto  unknown  to  us.  There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  whatever  may  have  been  the  hearing  accorded  to  these 
pathetic  appeals, —  and  the  preservation  of  the  tablets 
shows  that  they  were  at  least  carefully  pigeon-holed, —  the 
strongholds  of  Egyptian  rule  in  Asia  still  nominally  re- 
tained were  soon  surrendered  to  the  Hettites  and  to  native 
Canaanites  of  one  tribe  or  another.  For  the  civil  war  in 
the  Nile  country  continued  after  the  death  of  the  unfortu- 
nate visionary  who  inaugurated  it,  and  expeditions  over  the 
Isthmus  were  pretermitted  till  the  rise  of  a  new  dynasty. 

§  153.  The  most  striking  fact  among  the  disclosures  of 
these  new-found  historical  treasures,  and  one  whose  sig- 
nificance it  is  not  easy  to  estimate,  is  the  prevalence  and 
range  of  Babylonian  influence  in  all  the  vast  region  from 

1  All  in  the  Berlin  collection  ;  see  §  148,  note. 

2  Nr.  64  in  the  Br.  M.  collection. 


CH.  II,  §  153     BABYLONIAN   CULTURE    PARAMOUNT  185 


Upper  Egypt  to  the  Persian  Gulf.  A  single  indication 
may  suffice.  It  will  have  been  noticed,  even  by  the  casual 
reader  of  these  pages,  that  the  officials  whose  letters  to  the 
king  of  Egypt  have  been  referred  to,  bear  Hebrew  (that  is, 
Canaanitic)  names.  They  write  to  the  Pharaoh,  not  in  his 
own  tongue,  not  in  their  own,  but  in  that  of  a  far-off 
people  whose  country,  by  the  nearest  land  route,  was  over 
a  thousand  miles  away.  It  has  been  rightly  supposed  that 
there  was  then,  and  that  there  had  been  for  many  centuries, 
close  communication  between  Palestine  and  Egypt,  and  it 
might  fairly  be  expected  that  the  Egyptian  language  would 
be  acquired  and  used,  at  least  in  official  communications 
between  the  Palestinian  or  Syrian  vassals  and  their  sover- 
eign. Or  "the  language  of  Canaan"  might  have  been 
learned  by  the  Egyptians,  as  Hebrew  Prophecy  anticipated 
it  would  be  learned  under  reversed  conditions  in  some 
future  age  (Isa.  xix.  18).  The  only  explanation  of  the 
actual  phenomenon  is  that  the  Babylonians  had  once,  and 
up  to  a  comparatively  recent  period,  occupied  the  whole  of 
the  habitable  territory  as  far  as  the  Mediterranean  and  the 
River  of  Egypt ;  that  the  period  of  their  occupation  was 
very  long  and  scarcely  intermittent;  that  their  influence 
extended  to  the  minutest  details  of  business  and  social 
life ;  and  that  their  language  and  literature  formed  a  liberal 
education  for  all  the  cultivated  classes  in  Western  Asia. 
For  the  foreign  language  could  only  have  been  used  by  so 
many  persons  widely  removed  from  one  another,  when  the 
teaching  and  learning  of  that  language  came  as  a  matter 
of  course  from  the  constant  associations  of  daily  life  and 
the  indelible  impressions  of  permanent  institutions.  We 
shall  have  occasion  to  see  how  little  influence  Egypt  exer- 
cised at  any  later  stage  upon  the  people  of  Palestine,  and 
how  great  was  that  of  the  Babylonian  race.  The  present 
revelation,  given  in  Babylonian  language,  from  the  very 
soil  of  Egypt  itself,  shows  that  the  same  relative  position 
was  held  —  we  may  boldly  say  it  —  back  to  the  earliest 
recorded  time.  The  Western  expeditions  and  conquests 


186  PROGRESS   OF  MESOPOTAMIA  BOOK  III 

of  Sargon  I  and  Naram-Sin  are  no  mere  legend;  the  com- 
mercial activity  of  their  successors  of  Southern  Babylonia, 
from  the  forests  of  Northern  Syria  to  the  Sinaitic  penin- 
sula, are  now  seen  in  the  light  of  their  enduring  results ; 
the  story  of  Gen.  xiv.  is  no  narrative  of  isolated  events, 
but  the  fragmentary  commemoration  of  enterprises  which 
were  for  many  centuries  the  order  of  the  day.  We  are 
learning  more  clearly  as  each  year  of  discovery  goes  by, 
that  what  the  Grecians  and  Romans  were  as  civilizers  and 
conquerors  to  the  world  we  still  call  "ancient,"  the  Baby- 
lonians were  to  countries  and  peoples  of  an  antiquity 
immeasurably  more  remote. 

§  154.  Scarcely  less  interesting  is  the  indication  given 
in  these  letters  of  the  civilization  of  the  countries  from 
which  they  came.  Upon  the  advancement  in  culture  of 
Babylonia  and  Egypt  it  is  not  necessary  to  say  anything. 
The  existence  of  a  kingdom  in  Western  Mesopotamia, 
standing  on  a  footing  of  equality  with  Egypt,  of  itself 
speaks  eloquently  of  the  development  of  the  most  valuable 
territory  lying  between  the  two  great  empires.  Its  prog- 
ress in  art,  as  well  as  in  political  influence,  is  attested  by 
the  mention  of  the  richly  ornamented  articles  sent  as  gifts 
by  the  king  of  Mitani.1  These,  and  the  like  facts  of  a 
time  antecedent  to  the  establishment  of  the  Hettite  king- 
dom, furnish  evidence  both  of  the  energy  and  progressive- 
ness  of  the  non-Semitic  peoples  north  of  the  Mesopotamia!! 
plain,  and  of  their  participation  in  the  culture  of  Babylonia. 
They  also  suggest  to  us  how  it  came  to  pass,  that  from  the 
earliest  authentic  times,  the  tribes  that  inhabited  the 
mountain  slopes  and  valleys  of  Armenia  and  Cappadocia 
were  so  advanced  in  the  arts  of  peace  and  war.  I  only 
allude  in  passing  to  the  internal  organization  and  develop- 
ment of  Syria  and  Palestine  two  centuries  before  the 
incoming  of  the  Hebrews,  and  of  the  achievements  of  the 
Phoenicians  on  the  sea  and  the  coastlands.2  The  most 

1  E.g.  in  Letters  8  and  9  of  Br.  M.  collection. 

2  See  the  letters  from  Tyre,  e.g.  Nr.  28  in  the  Br.  M.  collection. 


CH.  II,  §  154     BABYLONIAN  LANGUAGE   AND   WRITING          187 

suggestive  fact  of  all  is  the  prevalence,  not  simply  of  one 
language  for  purposes  of  business  and  diplomacy,  but  of 
one  system  of  writing,  and  that  used  not  only  for  the 
Babylonian  language,  but  for  the  native  languages  as  well. 
Two  remarks  may  be  obviously  made  upon  this.  The 
study  of  these  difficult  and  complicated  characters  must 
have  been  well-nigh  universal  throughout  the  broad  area 
of  Babylonian  influence.  In  every  one  of  the  numerous 
districts  of  Palestine,1  for  example,  the  leading  men  were 
familiar  with  all  the  niceties  of  the  wedge-writing,  while 
the  preparation  of  the  tablets  and  the  delicate  mechanical 
work  of  the  stylus  must  be  added  to  the  list  of  the  accom- 
plishments which  we  may  justly  put  to  the  credit  of  at  least 
the  "classes"  among  the  pre-Mosaic  Palestinians.  It  is 
superfluous  to  suggest  that  indefinitely  large  auxiliary 
attainments  in  many  regions  of  intellectual  activity  are 
implied  in  this  single  fact.  Another  observation  is  of 
wider  bearing.  We  have  as  yet  had  no  indication,  either 
from  this  or  from  any  other  source,  that  the  so-called 
Phoenician  alphabet  was  in  use  anywhere  in  the  fifteenth 
century  B.C.  To  whatever  place  of  origin  it  may  be  finally 
assigned,  it  seems  clear  that  it  had  then  no  large  Semitic 
publicity.  The  universal  employment  of  the  cuneiform 
system  in  the  North-Semitic  realm,  should  give  aid  and 
comfort  to  the  small  group  of  scholars  who  hold  to  the 
conviction  that  from  it,  and  not  from  the  Egyptian  hiero- 
glyphics or  the  Central-Arabian  alphabet,  that  system  of 
writing  was  derived  which  has  become  the  main  working 
instrument  of  the  world's  civilization.2 

1  Evidence  of  this  fact  is  beginning  to  come  in  from  other  sources.     I 
allude  to  the  well-known  discovery  of  a  contemporary  cuneiform  tablet 
found  at  Lachish  by  Mr.  F.  J.  Bliss,  of  Beyrut.     Lachish  appears  at  that 
time  to  have  been  united  in  administration  with   Sidon.     The  Lachish 
tablet  makes  mention  of  Zimrida  as  the  governor,  who,  in  Br.  M.  Nr.  30, 
is  called  governor  of  Sidon  and  Lachish. 

2  For  a  discussion  of  the  bearing  of  the  forms  of  the  cuneiform  signs 
in  the  El  Amarna   tablets,  and   of    other   indications  of  the   spread  of 
Babylonian  institutions,  particularly  the  stamping  of  money  (rings  and 


188  GENERAL   POLITICAL   SITUATION  BOOK  III 

§  155.  The  general  political  situation  may  now  be 
sketched  in  broad  outlines.  Egypt  was  in  the  last  stage 
of  her  first  and  most  extensive  sovereignty  in  Asia.  The 
El  Amarna  tablets  show  plainly  enough  that  her  inability 
to  retain  her  possessions  was  not  due  to  lack  of  able  and 
devoted  officials,  but  to  the  absence  of  a  consistent  resolute 
policy  in  foreign  administration,1  chargeable  in  great 
measure  to  the  instability  of  government  at  home.  Baby- 
lonia was  now  reduced  from  the  position  of  the  predomi- 
nant to  that  of  a  co-ordinate  power  in  the  affairs  of 
Western  Asia.  Her  most  formidable  rival  had  for  some 
time  been  Egypt,  but  the  interference  of  the  latter  was 
simply  made  possible  through  the  diminution  of  the  power 
and  prestige  of  Babylonia,  which  had  been  confined  not 
only  to  the  country  east  of  the  Euphrates,  but  actually  to 
her  own  natural  boundaries  on  the  lower  stretches  of  the 
great  Rivers.  Already  we  had  learned  of  rivalry  between 
the  Kasshite  Babylonians  and  a  people  on  the  Middle  Eu- 
phrates (§  123),  and  even  of  a  successful  incursion  into 
Karduniash  (§  121)  by  the  latter.  This  took  place  about  a 
century  before  the  date  of  Burraburiash  and  the  heretic  king 
of  Egypt,  and  in  the  mean  time  there  had  arisen  in  the  same 
Mesopotamia!!  region  the  kingdom  of  Mltani,  which  now 
stood  as  a  solid  barrier  between  all  possible  advances  from 
Egypt  on  the  west  or  from  Assyria  and  Babylonia  on  the 
east,  and  occupying  an  important  place  for  two  centuries 
more.  As  for  Assyria,  her  time  of  aggressive  action  was 
yet  to  come.  She  was  now,  however,  alert  and  watchful, 
with  an  eye  constantly  on  the  roads  to  Mesopotamia,  from 
which  she  hoped  to  exclude  forever  the  mother  country, 
that  had  played  out  her  part  in  the  affairs  of  the  world. 
Before  the  advent  of  the  Assyrians  as  arbiters  and  con- 
bars  of  gold  and  silver),  and  the  standard  of  weight  for  the  regulation 
of  a  currency  in  the  markets  of  the  world,  see  the  essay  of  Lehmann 
already  alluded  to  (§  148.  note). 

1  For  a  vivid  picture  of  the  troublous  vicissitudes  of  the  small  subject 
states  of  Egypt,  see  Maspero,  Histoire  ancienne,  4  ed.,  p.  192  f. 


CH.  II,  §  155       THE    HETTITES   FORESHADOWED  189 

querors  another  period  of  Asiatic  history  was  to  intervene, 
in  which  the  leading  r61e  was  to  be  acted  by  a  people 
whose  activity  in  Syria  and  Palestine  has  already  been 
indicated,  whose  large  participation  in  the  affairs  of  the 
West-land  is  ominously  foreshadowed  in  the  tablets  of 
El  Amarna,  and  who  in  these  inscriptions  are  vaguely 
referred  to  as  acting  with  the  Canaanitic  insurgents. 


CHAPTER   III 

THE   HETTITES    IN    SYEIA 

§  156.  IT  is  possible  that  the  Hettites  have  in  later 
times  secured  a  larger  share  of  popular  attention  than  their 
historical  importance  really  deserves.  But  this  is  a  mis- 
take which  the  friends  of  Oriental  and  Biblical  learning 
will  readily  overlook  in  view  of  the  indirect  benefits  of  the 
researches  that  have  been  made  and  the  modicum  of  solid 
results  that  has  been  secured.  Certainly  the  nature  and 
unexpected  range  in  time  and  place  of  the  discoveries,  and 
the  welcome  illustration  they  have  afforded  to  obscure 
passages  in  the  Bible  and  in  contemporary  literature, 
justify  a  large  portion  of  the  curiosity  they  have  excited. 
The  more  important  events  in  their  history,  as  occupants 
of  Syria  and  Palestine,  we  shall  have  to  touch  upon  in  the 
proper  places.  Much  more  difficult  is  it  to  give  a  satis- 
factory comprehensive  account  of  their  national  and  racial 
character,  and  of  their  early  achievements  as  a  people. 
While  it  is  possible  to  fix  approximately  the  time  when 
they  became  one  of  the  dominant  powers  of  Western  Asia, 
and  the  stages  of  their  rise  and  decline  in  political  influ- 
ence, the  somewhat  less  important  but  very  fascinating 
questions  of  their  origin,  their  general  ethnical  and  politi- 
cal associations,  and  the  character  of  their  language, 
religion,  and  social  institutions,  still  await  their  final 
solution.  The  main  difficulty  does  not  lie  altogether  in 
the  lack  of  monumental  remains ;  for  these,  it  is  claimed, 
are  fairly  abundant.  The  chief  obstacle  is  the  character  of 
the  Hettite  writing,  which  has  hitherto  resisted  all  attempts 
at  decipherment,  and  the  peculiar  features  of  the  engraved 

190 


CH.  Ill,  §  157  CURRENT   THEORIES  191 

and  sculptured  figures  of  supposed  representatives  of  the 
race,  whose  identity  with  similar  pictorial  devices  spread 
over  a  wide  area  is  plausible  and  yet  not  absolutely 
certain.1 

§  157.  It  is  now  the  prevailing  opinion  that  the 
Hettites  known  to  the  Bible  writers  and  to  the  con- 
temporary Egyptians  and  Assyrians  formed  part  of  a  large 
confederation  or  group  of  kindred  peoples  extending  from 
the  shores  of  the  ^Egean  through  Asia  Minor  to  the 
Euphrates,  and  from  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea  to  Mount 
Lebanon.  So  Professor  Brown,  after  describing  the  monu- 
ments which  are  found  along  the  old  great  roads  leading 
eastward  from  Smyrna  and  Phocsea  to  Cappadocia,  and 
southeastward  through  the  Cilician  gates  to  Syria,  and 
after  indicating  the  general  similarity  of  the  figures 
and  written  characters  which  they  bear,  remarks  that  "at 
some  time  in  the  past  the  whole  territory  of  Asia  Minor 
and  Northern  Syria  must  have  been  under  the  influence  of 
one  great  people  or  family  of  kindred  peoples,  which  have 
thus  left  their  traces  for  nearly  one  thousand  miles."2 

1  Fact  and  speculation  in  vogue  \ip  to  date  were  admirably  summarized 
by  Professor  Francis  Brown's  article,  The  Hittites,  Presb.  Review,  1880, 
p.  277-303.     Cheyne's  article  in  the  Encycl.  Brit.,  with  the  same  head- 
ing (1881),  is  still  worth  consulting.     W.  Wright's  popular  volume,  Tlie 
Empire  of  the  Hittites  (1884,  2d  ed.   1886),  contains  an  historical  sum- 
mary, but  is  chiefly  valuable  for  its  numerous  excellent  plates  and  smaller 
illustrations.     Of   Sayce's  writings  on  the   subject,   particular  attention 
should  be  called  to  his  essay  in  TSBA.  VII,  2  (1880),  Monuments  of  the 
Hittites,  and  his  suggestive  little  book  The  Hittites  ;   the  Story  of  a  For- 
rjotten  Empire  (By-paths  of  Bible  Knowledge,  No.   XII,  1888),   besides 
the  chapter  on  Lydia  in  his  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East  (1884).     The 
most  elaborate  work  is  that  of  Professor  J.  Campbell,  The  Hittites;  their 
Inacri/itions  and  History  (2  vols.,  Toronto,    1800),  devoted  both  to  the 
linguistic  and  ethnological  and  historical  sides  of  the  whole  subject.     The 
best  repository  of  illustrations  of  the  monuments  is  vol.  iv  of  Perrot  and 
Chipiez,  V Histoire  de  Part  dans   Vantfijitite  (1887).      Essays  specially 
devoted  to  the  decipherment  of  the  language  will  be  cited  below.     Full 
references  to  the  subsidiary  archaeological  and  geographical  literature  are 
to  be  found  in  Professor  Brown's  article  just  referred  to. 

2  L.c.  p.  279. 


192  "THE   HETTITES   MOUNTAINEERS"  BOOK  III 

Similarly  Sayce,1  with  much  fulness  of  illustration,  and 
more  definitely:  "The  Hittite  monuments  of  Asia  Minor 
.  .  .  show  that  the  central  point  of  Hittite  power  was  a 
square  on  either  side  of  the  Taurus  range,  which  included 
Carchemish  and  Komagene  in  the  south,  the  district  east 
of  the  Halys  on  the  north,  and  the  country  of  which 
Malatiyeh  was  the  capital  in  the  east.  The  Hittite  tribes, 
in  fact,  were  mountaineers  from  the  plateau  of  Kappadokia, 
who  had  spread  themselves  out  in  all  directions.  A  time 
came  when,  under  the  leadership  of  powerful  princes,  they 
marched  along  the  two  highroads  of  Asia  Minor  and  estab- 
lished their  supremacy  over  the  coast-tribes  of  the  far 
west,  .  .  .  they  had  carried  their  arms  through  the  whole 
length  of  Asia  Minor;  they  had  set  up  satraps  in  the  cities 
of  Lydia,  and  had  brought  the  civilization  of  the  East  to 
the  barbarous  tribes  of  the  distant  West."  The  main 
ground  on  which  these  wide  conclusions  are  based  is  the 
fact  that  the  human  and  other  figures  portrayed  upon  the 
monuments  are  of  the  same  general  type ;  they  indicate  a 
people  of  the  same  cast  of  features,  with  the  same  peculiar 
sort  of  attire,  in  the  same  prevailing  attitudes,  and  engaged 
in  similar  favourite  actions,  such  as  offering  sacrifice,  and 
marching  proudly  to  war.  Besides,  the  inscriptions  found 
upon  many  of  the  monuments  are  declared  to  be  written 
in  the  same  characters,  and  as  the  products  of  the  same 
civilization,  to  be  presumably  a  mark  of  identity  of  race  on 
the  part  of  the  writers. 

§  158.  As  to  what  the  racial  connections  of  this  sup- 
posed people  were  some  of  the  authorities  have  no  doubt 
whatever.  Major  C.  R.  Conder2  makes  them  out  to  be  a 
branch  of  the  Altaic  or  "  Turanian  "  race,  to  which  every- 
thing in  Asia  not  clearly  Aryan  or  Semitic  has  been  at  one 
time  or  another  assigned.  Professor  Campbell  makes  a 
wider  unification ;  starting  with  "  Ephron  the  Hittite  "  of 
Genesis,  he  broadens  out  his  basis  of  classification  until  a 

1  The  Hit  tit™,  p.  95  f. 

2  Altaic  Monuments  and  Hittite  Inscriptions,  London,  1887  ;  2d  ed.  1889. 


CH.  Ill,  §  158        "TURANIANS   OK    MONGOLOIDS"  193 

vast  number  of  races  and  tribes  as  yet  unclaimed  in  Asia 
and  America,  are  mustered  upon  it  in  orderly  array.  His 
evidence  is  mainly  the  supposed  testimony  of  language. 
Professor  Sayce  bases  his  conclusions  upon  the  forms, 
features,  and  accoutrements  of  the  figures  portrayed  upon 
the  sculptures.  As  we  shall  see,  the  Egyptians  had  much 
to  do  with  the  Hettites  in  their  Asiatic  wars,  and,  accord- 
ing to  Sayce,  their  monuments  represent  their  adversaries 
"with  yellow  skins  and  'Mongoloid'  features,  receding 
foreheads,  oblique  eyes,  and  protruding  upper  jaws,"  just 
as  their  own  sculptures  portray  them,  wherever  they  are 
found  throughout  Asia  Minor  or  in  Northern  Syria.  This 
concurrence  of  testimony  is  summed  up  as  follows :  "  They 
were  short  and  thick  of  limb,  and  the  front  part  of  their 
faces  was  pushed  forward  in  a  curious  and  somewhat 
repulsive  way.  The  forehead  retreated,  the  cheek-bones 
were  high,  the  nostrils  were  large,  the  upper  lip  protrusive. 
They  had,  in  fact,  according  to  the  craniologists,  the 
characteristics  of  a  Mongoloid  race.  Like  the  Mongols, 
moreover,  their  skins  were  yellow  and  their  eyes  and  hair 
were  black."1  It  is  certainly  not  opposed  to  this  view, 
and  is  perhaps  significant  of  the  ultimate  starting-point  of 
the  migrations  that  all  their  characteristic  portraitures 
present  them  to  us  as  clothed  with  a  short  tunic  and  shod 
with  boots  turned  up  at  the  ends.  I  quote  again  from 
Sayce : 2  "  In  place  of  the  trailing  robes  of  the  Syrians,  the 
national  costume  was  a  tunic  which  did  not  reach  quite  to 
the  knees.  It  was  only  after  their  settlement  in  the 
Syrian  cities  that  they  adopted  the  dress  of  the  country; 
the  sculptured  rocks  of  Asia  Minor  represent  them  with 
the  same  short  tunic  as  that  which  distinguished  the 
Dorians  of  Greece  or  the  ancient  inhabitants  of  Ararat. 
But  the  most  characteristic  portion  of  the  Hittite  garb 
were  the  shoes  with  upturned  ends.  Wherever  the  figure 
of  a  Hittite  is  portrayed,  there  we  find  this  peculiar  form 
of  boot.  It  reappears  among  the  hieroglyphs  of  the 

1  Sayce,  The  Uittites,  p.  15,  101  f.  -  Ibid.  80  f. 


194  DIVERGING   OPINIONS  BOOK  III 

inscriptions,  and  the  Egyptian  artists  who  adorned  the 
walls  of  the  Ramesseum  at  Thebes  have  placed  it  on 
the  feet  of  the  Hittite  defenders  of  Kadesh.  The  boot  is 
really  a  snow-shoe,  admirably  adapted  for  walking  over 
snow,  but  ill-suited  for  the  inhabitants  of  a  level  or 
cultivated  country.  .  .  .  Equally  significant  is  the  long 
fingerless  glove,  which  is  one  of  the  most  frequent  of 
Hittite  hieroglyphs.  The  thumb  alone  is  detached  from 
the  rest  of  the  bag  in  which  the  ringers  were  enclosed. 
Such  a  glove  is  an  eloquent  witness  to  the  wintry  cold  of 
the  regions  from  which  its  wearers  came,  and  a  similar 
glove  is  still  used  during  the  winter  months  by  the 
peasants  of  modern  Kappadokia." 

§  159.  For  more  specific  information  as  to  the  monu- 
ments and  their  sites  the  writings  mentioned  above  must 
be  consulted.  I  have  only  to  repeat  that  the  general 
theory  just  outlined  has  not  found  acceptance  with  all 
competent  investigators.  Notably,  Professor  W.  M.  Ram- 
say, perhaps  the  greatest  authority  of  the  time  on  the 
geography  and  archeology  of  Asia  Minor,  maintains 1 
that,  while  there  is  a  similarity  of  art  between  the  monu- 
ments of  Northern  Cappadocia  and  those  of  Syria,  the 
people  of  the  latter  country,  from  whom  the  memorials 
proceeded,  were  not  akin  to  those  of  the  former,  but  that, 
like  the  Phrygians  of  the  Troad,  they  fell  heir  to  the 
civilization  of  the  empire  of  Pteria  after  its  decay  had 
begun.  It  is  evident  that  the  question  of  relationship  of 
the  peoples  concerned  is  very  obscure  and  intricate.  The 
longest  step  towards  its  solution  would  be  taken  by  a 
decipherment  of  the  written  characters,  which  would  reveal 
at  once,  provided  the  material  is  sufficiently  abundant,  the 
character  of  the  language,  or  languages,  they  represent. 
The  difficulty  of  the  whole  subject,  as  well  as  the  diver- 
gence of  views,  may  be  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  the 

1  The  Historical  Geography  of  Asia  Minor,  Royal  Geogr.  Society's 
Supplementary  Papers,  vol.  iv,  1891. 


CH.  Ill,  §  160       ATTEMPTS   AT   DECIPHERMENT  195 

eminent  Semitist,  HaleVy,  who  has  always  maintained  the 
Semitic  character  of  the  Hettite  language  and  race,  now 
believes  that  he  has  proved  the  matter  by  his  translation 
of  two  inscriptions  found  at  Zinjirli,  at  the  extreme  border 
of  Northern  Syria,  and  preserved  in  the  Museum  of 
Berlin ; l  while  Professor  Jensen  of  Marburg,  the  latest 
decipherer  of  the  Hettite  writing,  makes  out  the  language 
to  be  Indo-European,  most  nearly  akin  to  Armenian.2  It 
is  to  be  hoped,  for  the  benefit  and  reputation  of  Oriental 
science,  that  the  attempt  of  Jensen  may  turn  out  to  be 
the  real  solution  of  the  problem  of  the  Hettite  language. 
The  number  of  supposed  answers  to  the  enigma  has  been 
surprisingly  great,  considering  that  comparatively  few 
busy  themselves  with  such  matters.  The  most  notable 
attempts  have  been  those  of  Sayce,3  Ball,4  Conder,5  Camp- 
bell,6 Peiser,7  and  that  of  Jensen  just  noted.  All  but  the 
last-named  have  been  proved  to  be  certainly  unsuccessful 
as  to  most  of  their  contentions,  while  that  of  Jensen  is  now 
on  its  trial.  Whatever  may  be  the  final  award,  it  is  plain 
that  Sayce  must  be  credited  with  having  made  the  first 
solid  beginnings,  since  certain  of  his  general  conclusions 
have  been  used  by  his  successors  as  initiatory  postulates. 
§  160.  The  reader  will  perceive  from  the  above  state- 
ment of  facts  that  it  would  be  premature  to  dogmatize 
upon  questions  so  much  in  dispute.  But  a  modest  opinion 
may  be  expressed  as  to  the  antiquity  of  the  Hettites  in 
Syria.  I  have  already  called  attention  to  the  great  value 

1  Session  of  Acadgmie  des  Inscriptions  et  Belles-lettres,  Aug.  6,  1802. 

2  Sunday  School  Times,  March  25  and  April  1,  1893.     Cf.  ZA.  VII, 
365  f.  (31  Dec.  1892). 

3TSBA.    vol.   vii,   2    (1880),   the   Independent,    May   18,    1882,   and 
ch.  xi  in  Wright's  Empire  of  the  Hittites. 

4  PSBA.  vol.  ix  (1887). 

5  Altaic  Monuments,  etc. 

6  The  Hittites,  etc.,  vol.  i  (1890). 

7  F.  E.  Peiser  (Breslau),  Die  hetitischen  Inschriften,  ein  Versuch  ihrer 
Entzifferung,    Berlin,    1892.      See    Jensen    in    ZA.    VII,    357    ff.,   and 
M.  Jastrow,  Jr.,  in  Sunday  School  Times,  Dec.  10,  1892. 


196  AGE    OF    THE    HETTITES   IX   SYRIA  BOOK  TU 


of  the  Babylonian  nomenclature  in  these  inquiries  (§  131, 
note).  Now  the  immemorial  name  of  Northern  Syria 
among  the  Babylonians  is  mat  Hatte  (§  133),  and  this 
name  was  used  long  before  the  people  emerged  in  recorded 
history;  e.g.  in  astrological  inscriptions  which  were  drawn 
up  before  2000  B.C.1  If  any  other  people  than  they  had 
possessed  the  country  in  the  earliest  times,  the  Baby- 
lonians would  certainly  have  named  it  after  them  and  not 
after  the  Hettites.  Indeed,  it  seems  probable  that  before 
either  Canaan ites  or  Aramaeans  appeared  west  of  the 
Euphrates,  the  Hettites  had  settled  throughout  Syria 
and  the  Amorites  in  Palestine.  This  gives  additional 
interest  to  the  opinion  of  Ramsay  (§  159)  that  the 
Hettites  of  Syria  were  a  separate  people  from  their  sup- 
posed kindred  in  Asia  Minor.  It  is  also  not  without  a 
special  allusion  to  the  distant  past  that  the  learned  Ezekiel 
(xvi.  3,  45)  says  of  ancient  Jerusalem,  "  the  Amorite  was 
thy  father  and  thy  mother  a  Hettite."  Nor  should  we  ig- 
nore in  this  connection  the  notices  of  the  dealings  of  Abra- 
ham with  the  descendants  of  Hettite  settlers  in  Palestine 
in  the  twenty-third  century  B.C.  (Gen.  xxiii. ;  xxv.  9  f.), 
or  the  other  references  to  the  same  people  in  the  patriarchal 
times.  We  must  also  remember  that  the  Egyptians,  in  the 
earliest  recorded  expeditions  into  Syria  (§  145),  had  to  do 
with  the  Hettites,  though  unfortunately  the  date  of  these 
occurrences  is  too  late  to  be  of  decisive  importance.  This 
at  least  it  is  well  to  emphasize,  that,  as  in  Palestine  the 
Amorites  preceded  the  Canaanites,  so  in  Syria  the  Hettites 
preceded  the  Aramaeans.  What  their  ultimate  racial  affini- 
ties were,  Avhether,  for  example,  the  peoples  whom  the 
Hettite  chiefs  of  Syria  summoned  to  their  aid  in  the 
fourteenth  century  from  all  parts  of  Asia  Minor  (§  163) 
Avere  bound  to  their  allies  by  other  ties  than  those  of 
A'assalage  or  temporary  interest  of  one  kind  or  another,  it 
is  impossible  as  yet  to  determine.  This  and  other  interest- 
ing questions  depend  for  their  solution,  in  the  first  place, 

1  Cf.  Wiiickler  GBA.  p.  72,  155. 


CH.  Ill,  §  1(31  THE   HETTITE   MONARCHY  197 

upon  the  results  of  palaeographical  and  linguistic  research, 
which  we  may  be  well  assured  is  as  yet  only  in  the  first 
stage  of  its  march  of  discovery. 

§  161.  We  have  henceforth  to  do  directly  only  with  the 
Hettites  1  in  the  narrow  and  best-ascertained  sense.  What- 
ever may  have  been  their  starting-place  and  their  ante- 
cedents, it  is  evident  that  in  Syria  they  sooner  or  later 
established  an  organization  of  their  own  independent  of 
any  hypothetical  outside  allies  or  conquerors.  In  that 
country  they  were  specially  favoured  by  a  genial  climate 
and  a  fine  opportunity  to  plunder  or  lay  toll  upon  wealthy 
neighbours.  Hence  their  aggregation  in  the  Orontes 
A'alley  and  their  more  powerful  and  lasting  concentration 
on  the  right  bank  of  the  Euphrates.  They  thus  became, 
in  fact,  the  founders  of  the  first  great  state  of  the  West- 
land.  Their  independent  existence  in  larger  or  smaller 
communities  south  of  the  Taurus  was  maintained  from  the 
fifteenth  to  the  ninth  century  B.C.,  the  period  of  their 
greatest  power  being  the  fourteenth  and  thirteenth  cen- 
turies. They  were  thereafter  partly  subdued  and  partly 
absorbed  by  the  Aramaeans,  and  finally  conquered  and 
politically  effaced  by  the  Assyrians.  Their  historical 
importance  does  not  consist  so  much  in  the  extent  or 
duration  of  their  conquests  as  in  the  indirect  influence  of 
their  control.  Apart  from  their  instrumentality  as  bearers 

1  Though  we  hold  that  there  were  "Hettites"  outside  of  Syria,  we 
must  remember  that  this  name  is  met  with  only  as  applied  to  them.  The 
origin  of  the  word  is  naturally  uncertain,  and  may  be  due  to  foreigners. 
It  is  conceivable  that  it  is  based  upon  a  feminine  stem  Hattn  =  Hantu 
from  Hanu  (§  123).  The  form  of  the  word  is  substantially  the  same  in 
all  ancient  documents,  graphic  variations  being  due  merely  to  the  different 
modes  in  which  the  writers  of  the  several  communities  indicated  vowel 
sounds.  Our  modern  word  "  Hittite  "  (which  I  have  taken  the  liberty  to 
modify)  is  the  least  correct  of  all,  having  been  learned  from  the  post- 
classical  pronunciation  of  Hebrew  words  given  in  the  Massoretic  text  of 
the  Old  Testament.  The  XeTTcuoi  of  the  Septuagint  is  identical  with  the 
'•  Cheta"  (Chetta)  of  the  Egyptian,  and  this  again  represents  accurately 
the  Chatte  (Chette)  of  the  cuneiform  texts.  Presumably,  therefore,  the 
original  form  was  Chettai,  as  started  by  the  Aramaeans,  the  next  neighbours. 


198  GROWTH   OF   THE    HETTITE   POWER          BOOK  III 

of  civilization  westward  over  Asia  Minor,  their  greatest 
service  to  the  world  was  performed  in  keeping  the  Egyp- 
tians out  of  Palestine,  while  the  latter  were  strong  enough 
to  have  seized  and  held  the  Land  of  Promise  against  any 
other  Asiatic  power.  Thus,  if  it  had  not  been  for  the 
aggressive  part  played  by  the  Hettitejs,  the  Israelitish 
occupation  of  Palestine,  with  all  its  consequences  to  the 
world,  would  have  been,  humanly  speaking,  impossible. 

§  162.  Of  the  mode  of  colonization  and  conquest  pur- 
sued by  the  Hettites  in  historical  ages  we  have  no  definite 
information.  From  the  first  Mesopotamia!!  settlers  they 
met  with  no  serious  opposition,  since  the  small  Aramaean 
trading  communities  were  incapable  of  systematic  aggres- 
sion, and  the  kingdom  of  Mltani  (§  150)  had  not  extended 
its  sway  westward  of  the  River.  They  are  first  heard  of 
under  Thothmes  III  (§  145),  but  his  reports  do  not  make 
it  appear  that  at  that  time  they  were  as  a  corporate  com- 
munity strongly  entrenched  in  Syria.  We  have  as  yet  no 
evidence  to  show  that  Kadesh  on  the  Orontes,  or  the 
fortress  of  Carchemish,  were  then  occupied  by  them.1 
They  are  merely  mentioned  as  tribute-givers  to  the  great 
conqueror.  Nor  in  the  El  Amarna  tablets  have  they  a 
prominent  place,  though  by  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century 
they  must  have  been  consolidated  into  a  formidable  con- 
federacy, since  the  king  of  Mltani  writes  2  of  an  invasion 
of  his  territory  by  them  to  Amenophis  III,  and  the  Egyp- 
tian prefects  of  the  same  Pharaoh  complain  of  trouble 
created  by  incursions  into  the  Egyptian  provinces.  The 
weakness  and  anarchy  of  the  empire  of  the  Nile  during  and 
after  the  regime  of  Amenophis  IV,  furnished  them  with 
their  great  opportunity.  It  is  altogether  probable  that  it 
was  during  this  period  that  they  made  Kadesh,  in  Ccelo- 
Syria,  which  was  in  any  case  lost  to  the  Egyptians,  their 
southern  capital,  as  the  great  strategic  and  commercial 

1  Indeed,  it  would  appear  that  this  region  was  regarded  as  being 
Amorite. 

2  Letter  Nr.  9  in  the  Br.  M.  collection. 


CH.  Ill,  §  163       THE    PERIOD  OF   HETTITE   RULE  199 

centre,  Carchemish,  had  long  been  their  northern  gathering- 
place.  The  completeness  of  their  occupation  of  Syria,  and 
the  undisputed  authority  which  \ve  soon  find  them  enjoying, 
were  rendered  possible  by  their  remarkable  national  soli- 
darity and  the  reciprocal  fidelity  of  their  various  com- 
munities. It  is  also  evident  that  they  permanently 
strengthened  themselves  by  a  more  tolerant  policy  than 
had  marked  the  Egyptian  rulers,  since  they  are  found  to 
have  amalgamated  completely  with  the  other  inhabitants 
of  Syria.  Their  rule,  as  a  whole,  must  be  regarded  as 
beneficial  to  their  much-harassed  subjects,  and  we  can 
heartily  sympathize  with  them  in  the  attempts  they  were 
soon  to  make  to  keep  the  Egyptians  from  returning  to  the 
land  they  had  vexed  and  despoiled.  The  very  motives  of 
the  Egyptian  invasions  had  been  a  barrier  to  their  success- 
ful settlement  in  the  country,  co-operating  thus  with  their 
characteristic  lack  of  the  colonizing  and  organizing  faculty. 
§  163.  We  come  now  to  the  next  period  in  the  history 
of  the  West-land,  that  of  the  predominance  of  the  Hettites. 
Here,  our  chief  dependence  for  information  is  the  Egyptian 
monuments,  which  are  especially  full  in  telling  of  the 
deeds  of  arms  wrought  by  the  several  Pharaohs.  The 
longest  accounts,  however,  are  only  poetical  embellish- 
ments of  the  most  creditable  of  the  actual  facts,  and  for 
these  facts  we  must  look  rather  to  acknowledged  results 
than  to  the  exaggerations  and  inventions  of  the  official 
panegyrists.  The  successors  of  Amenophis  IV,  being 
involved  in  the  strife  that  followed  his  futile  attempt  to 
reform  the  religion  and  to  free  the  social  and  political  life 
of  his  people  from  the  tyranny  of  the  priesthood,  were 
compelled  to  relax  their  grasp  upon  their  foreign  posses- 
sions, and  to  content  themselves  with  the  Nile  country 
alone.  Thus  the  Isthmus  of  Suez  became,  as  of  old,  the 
eastern  boundary  of  Egypt.  Meanwhile,  the  Hettites 
were  establishing  themselves  as  rulers  of  Syria,  and  main- 
taining and  extending  their  settlements  throughout  Asia 
Minor.  Thus,  when  the  Nineteenth  Dynasty  had  become 


200  EGYPTIAN  AGGRESSION  BOOK  III 

firmly  established,  and  its  princes  began  to  think  seriously 
of  regaining  the  old  Asiatic  subject  lands,  they  found  a 
very  different  sort  of  enemy  from  that  to  which  their 
predecessors  had  been  accustomed  up  to  a  century  before. 
The  business  was  now  not  to  overrun  the  village  com- 
munities and  cities  in  detail,  but  to  cope  with  a  well- 
compacted  state,  whose  hardy  troops  had  been  trained  to 
act  in  concert,  and  which  could  summon  to  its  aid  con- 
federates from  far  and  near,  accustomed  to  make  common 
cause  against  any  enemy  of  the  Hettite  race.  The  conflict 
began  after  the  new  dynasty  had  made  a  treaty  with 
Sapalel,  king  of  the  Hettites,  and  this  friendly  agreement 
was  broken  by  the  third  king,  Seti  I  (c.  1355),  who 
undertook  a  systematic  reduction  of  all  the  inhabitants  of 
Western  Asia.  His  career  in  North  Arabia  and  Southern 
Palestine  was  one  of  unbroken  success,  but  it  is  easy  to 
read  between  the  lines  of  the  Egyptian  reports  that  when 
it  came  to  an  invasion  of  the  northern  territory  the 
campaigns  were  indecisive,  and  the  ambitious  aggressor 
was  obliged  to  content  himself  with  the  possession  guar- 
anteed by  treaty  of  a  few  fortresses  in  advantageous  posi- 
tions, such  as  Gaza  and  Megiddo,  the  latter  probably 
marking  the  limits  of  Hettite  control.  Seti's  son  and 
successor,  the  celebrated  Ramses  II,  the  Sesostris  of  the 
Greeks,  the  most  famous  though  by  no  means  the  greatest 
ruler  of  ancient  Egypt,  waged,  during  many  years  of  his 
long  reign  (c.  1330-1260),  persistent  war  with  the  Hettite 
confederacy.  I  shall  not  give  the  details  of  these  cam- 
paigns according  to  the  one-sided  and  often  absurd  descrip- 
tions that  come  from  Egyptian  sources.  These  have  been 
published  elsewhere  for  English  readers.1  It  is  sufficient 
here  to  note  the  following  well-ascertained  facts.  The 
early  campaigns,  undertaken  shortly  after  the  accession  of 
the  king,  did  not  extend  beyond  the  bounds  of  Palestine 

i  RP.  II,  61  ff.     Cf.  Wright,  p.  105  ff.,  22  ff.  ;  Sayce,  The  Hittites, 
p.  24  ff. 


CH.  Ill,  §  101        BATTLES   AND   NEGOTIATIONS  201 

and  Phoenicia.  The  Hettites,  a  more  steady  and  reliable 
sort  of  people  than  their  contemporaries,  did  not  oppose 
the  advance  of  Ramses,  thus  abiding  faithfully  by  the  treaty 
concluded  with  Seti.  But  in  the  fourth  year  of  Ramses  a 
new  Hettite  prince,  Hetta-sar  (i.e.  "king  of  the  Hettite  "), 
came  to  the  throne  and  determined  to  put  a  stop  to  his 
ambitious  designs.  A  great  battle  was  fought  near  the 
Hettite  capital,  Kadesh,  in  which  the  prowess  of  Ramses 
is  said  to  have  saved  the  day  for  the  Egyptians.  In  spite 
of  all  the  literary  and  monumental  celebration  of  this  event, 
it  seems  to  have  been  indecisive.  The  war  went  on  for 
sixteen  years  longer,  and  as  it  is  only  once  that  we  find 
Ramses  to  have  gone  far  north  into  the  Hettite  realm,  the 
presumption  is  that  he  was  held  pretty  well  in  check  in 
Syria.  In  Palestine,  however,  he  seems  to  have  more  than 
held  his  own  in  spite  of  numerous  revolts,  and  the  famous 
treaty  of  peace  concluded  with  the  Hettites  in  his  twenty- 
first  year  did  not  disturb  him  in  its  possession.  This 
compact  was  really  a  memorable  affair  on  account  of  its 
solemn  and  sincere  engagements,  not  only  of  peace  and 
amity,  but  also  of  alliance  for  mutual  defence,  with  stipu- 
lations for  the  extradition  of  criminals  and  fugitives  from 
justice. 

§  164.  The  results  of  these  protracted  conflicts  were,  on 
the  whole,  beneficial  to  Palestine  and  Syria.  The  remain- 
ing forty-five  years  of  the  reign  of  Ramses  II  were  undis- 
turbed by  strife.  He  and  the  Hettite  rulers  were  joint 
guarantors  and  guardians  of  peace,  and  the  small  inter- 
mediate communities  doubtless  learned  also  to  live  and 
let  live.  That  during  this  period  trade  and  commerce, 
manufacture  and  art,  flourished  in  the  West-land,  as  they 
certainly  did  in  Egypt,  must  be  taken  for  granted.  Doubt- 
less, to  this  rare  time  of  peace  and  prosperity  a  great 
expansion  of  the  Canaanitic  cities  is  to  be  assigned. 
Many  influences  of  Egyptian  civilization  must  have  been 
transferred  to  the  whole  of  Western  Asia,  and  we  have, 
on  the  other  hand,  abundant  evidence  of  the  influx  of 


202  OPPRESSION   OF   THE    HEBREWS  BOOK  III 

immigrants  and  travellers  from  over  the  Isthmus,  in  the 
Semitization  of  the  Egyptian  language  and  the  favour 
shown  to  the  protecting  deities  of  the  Semites.  During 
this  period  of  tranquillity  the  Egyptians  asserted  at  least 
a  nominal  suzerainty  over  Palestine,  but  it  is  difficult 
to  believe  that  their  actual  administration  extended 
beyond  the  cities  of  the  Philistian  coast,  which  they 
still  regarded  as  frontier  fortresses.  The  Hettites,  mean- 
while, consolidated  their  power  in  Syria  and  northeast- 
ward to  beyond  the  Euphrates,  and  no  Egyptian  troops 
were  seen  to  the  north  of  Lebanon  for  over  seven  hundred 
years. 

§  165.  But  events  fraught  with  far  more  importance  to 
the  world  than  the  strife  or  alliances  of  the  greatest  rulers 
of  the  time  were  transpiring  in  Egypt,  among  the  descend- 
ants of  a  little  Hebrew  colony  that  had  been  admitted 
with  other  Semites  to  the  fertile  pasture-lands  of  the 
northeast  border, —  events  which  were  to  prepare  the  way 
for  the  reoccupation  of  the  home-land  of  Palestine,  with 
all  its  momentous  consequences  in  the  history  of  our  race 
(Hosea  xi.  1).  It  was  the  custom  of  the  Pharaohs  in 
carrying  out  their  great  architectural  enterprises  and  public 
works,  to  press  into  their  service  captives  taken  in  war, 
immigrants,  and  refugees ;  and,  in  the  later  years  of  the 
reign  of  Ramses  II  this  old-time  prescription  was  enforced 
with  special  urgency  on  account  of  the  vast  number  of  his 
undertakings.  The  Hebrews,  who  among  the  Semitic 
settlers  had  formerly  been  treated  with  peculiar  considera- 
tion, were  now  made  by  the  "king  who  knew  not  Joseph  " 
to  share  the  common  lot.  At  the  same  time,  his  jealousy 
of  the  strangers  of  the  same  race  from  Syria,  Palestine, 
and  Arabia,  whose  growing  numbers  and  wealth  seemed 
likely  to  furnish  the  conditions  for  a  new  invasion  by  the 
"Shepherds,"  led  Ramses  to  enact  special  measures  for 
their  reduction.  The  most  rigorous  and  oppressive  of 
these  were  enforced  against  the  Hebrews  as  the  most 
intelligent  and  thrifty,  and  presumably  the  most  danger- 


Cn.  Ill,  §  166     INVASIONS   FROM  BEYOND   THE   SEAS  203 

ous,  of  the  race.     This  hard  bondage  endured  for  many 
years. 

§  1G6.  Now,  however,  new  actors  appeared  on  the 
stage,  who  materially  changed  the  state  of  affairs  both  for 
Egypt  and  Syria.  The  power  and  splendour  of  Egypt 
passed  away  with  the  death  of  Ramses  the  Great,  and  soon 
afterwards,  in  the  fifth  year  of  his  successor,  Merneptah 
( c.  1200),  Egypt  was  invaded  by  a  host  of  strangers  from 
the  coasts  and  islands  of  the  Mediterranean.  These  peo- 
ples, whom  it  is  not  easy  to  identify  with  any  historic 
nationalities,  had  been  attracted  by  the  wealth  of  the 
Phoenician  cities  whose  colonies  were  planted  among  them. 
Their  depredations  were,  accordingly,  first  carried  on  in 
Syria  and  Palestine,  where  they  gave  a  fatal  shock  to  the 
influence  of  the  Hettites,  and  began  a  series  of  devastating 
attacks  on  the  flourishing  communities  of  the  Canaanites, 
which  probably  contributed  more  than  anything  else  to  the 
anarchy  that  afterwards  rendered  that  people  unable  to 
make  successful  combined  opposition  to  the  invading 
Israelites.  Their  first  fierce  attack  upon  Egypt  was 
repulsed,  and  the  empire  of  the  Xile  thus  relieved  from 
what  seemed  impending  destruction.  Then  followed  a 
period  of  confusion  and  internal  strife  in  Egypt,  during 
which  all  foreigners  were  treated  with  suspicion  as  being 
possible  intriguers,  and  the  hard  lot  of  the  Hebrews  was 
by  no  means  lightened.  The  suspicion  was  not  always 
ill-founded,  for  among  the  rival  pretenders  to  the  throne  a 
Syrian  resident  named  Arsu  succeeded  in  his  designs,  and 
actually  reigned  for  a  time  in  the  seat  of  the  Pharaohs. 
Finally,  about  half  a  century  after  the  death  of  Ramses 
II,  a  stable  government  was  once  more  inaugurated  by 
Ramses  III,  the  joint  founder  with  his  father  of  the 
Twentieth  Dynasty.  The  most  important  event  which 
occurred  in  Egypt  in  his  reign  of  over  thirty  years 
(c.  1210-1180)  was  a  repetition  on  a  larger  scale  of  an 
invasion  from  the  Grecian  lands  and  the  coasts  of  Asia 
Minor.  Outside  of  Egypt  this  movement  was  most 


204  RESULTS   OF   THE   INVASION  BOOK  III 

strongly  felt.  An  enormous  migration  of  various  tribes, 
moving  both  by  land  and  sea,  had  made  its  way  over  the 
whole  of  Syria,  breaking  up  the  Hettite  empire  so  effectu- 
ally that  it  is  not  mentioned  at  all  in  the  Hebrew  accounts 
of  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  The  change  wrought  by  them 
in  this  whole  region  must  have  been  of  fateful  importance. 
The  old  condition  of  things,  as  before  the  Hettite  occupa- 
tion, was,  at  least  in  this  respect,  resumed,  that  the  coun- 
try was  virtually  left  to  be  taken  by  the  first  best  invader. 
Palestine  and  Phoenicia  were  so  plundered  and  crippled 
that  when  Ramses,  after  his  repulse  of  the  invaders,  sought 
to  re-establish  his  authority  there,  he  met  with  no  oppo- 
sition. His  occupation,  however,  was  but  brief.  The 
northern  and  western  invaders,  who  permanently  settled 
in  Palestine,  doubtless  in  most  cases  gradually  merged 
themselves  in  the  native  population.  An  important  ex- 
ception, for  a  time  at  least,  must  be  noted  in  the  case  of 
the  Philistines,1  if  we  are  right  in  assuming  them  to  have 
been  a  deposit  of  this  flood-tide  from  the  Mediterranean 
(see  §  192). 

§  167.  It  is  towards  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Ramses  III 
that  the  Exodus  is  with  most  probability  to  be  placed.  It 
is  usually  assigned  to  the  time  of  Merneptah,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Ramses  II.  This  must,  however,  be  too  early, 
since  the  Egyptian  influence  in  Palestine  lasted  many 
years  after  his  day,  and  it  had,  like  the  Hettite  domination 
of  Syria,  entirely  vanished  at  the  time  of  the  Israelitish 
conquest.  Not  only  so,  but  the  whole  Israelitish  pre- 
liminary movement  would  have  been  impossible  till  the 
time  when  Egypt  had  relinquished  its  claim  to  Palestine, 
and  had  also  ceased  to  control  the  Shasu  of  the  Peninsula, 

1  See  Meyer.  GA.  §  200,  and  Dillmann  on  Gen.  x.  14.  Caphtor  (cf. 
Deut.  ii.  23  ;  1  Chr.  i.  12  ;  Am.  ix.  7  ;  Jer.  xlvii.  4)  is  usually  held  to  be 
a  name  of  Crete.  The  meaning  may  be  "Greater  Phoenicia"  (indicating 
a  colony)  in  the  Egyptian  language,  whence  Ebers  thinks  of  Phoenician 
<••  >lonists  on  the  coast  of  the  Delta  ;  see  Sayce,  The  Hit/her  Criticism  and 
the  Monuments,  p.  130.  But  the  language  of  Jeremiah  does  not  favour  this. 


CH.  Ill,  §  167  TIME   OF   THE  EXODUS  205 

among  whom  the  wanderings  of  the  Hebrews  took  place. 
Such  a  state  of  things  did  not  exist  until  after  the  death 
of  Ramses  III  and  until  the  time  of  his  feeble  successors, 
who  recalled  by  their  name  of  Ramses  alone  the  memory 
of  the  days  when  Egypt  was  an  Asiatic  power.  The 
fortunes  of  Egypt  will  now  cease  to  have  direct  interest 
for  us  for  some  hundreds  of  years,  since  it  no  longer 
influenced  the  destiny  of  Palestine. 


BOOK   IY 

ASSYRIANS  AND  BABYLONIANS 
CHAPTER  I 

ASSYRIA  TILL  THE   ERA   OF  PREDOMINANCE 

§  168.  A  GENERAL  description  of  the  geography  of 
Assyria  and  its  historical  boundaries  has  already  been 
given  (§  74).  Before  proceeding  with  our  rapid  survey 
of  Assyrian  history,  a  word  or  two  about  the  character  of 
the  people  will  be  in  place.  As  compared  with  Babylonia, 
some  striking  general  differences  are  to  be  noted.  The 
most  remarkable  of  these  is  perhaps  the  fact  that  the 
Assyrians  seem  to  have  been  of  a  much  purer  race  in 
historical  times  than  the  dwellers  on  the  Lower  Euphrates. 
There  is  no  change  in  the  type  of  face  shown  in  the 
numerous  sculptured  monuments  of  Nineveh,  and  they  all 
appear  to  have  the  aspect  of  an  unmixed  Semitic  people. 
Of  a  commingling  of  races,  or  at  least  of  the  introduction 
of  foreign  elements  into  the  native  Semitic,  we  find  in 
Assyria,  as  contrasted  with  Babylonia,  no  apparent  trace. 
Moreover,  there  is  a  singular  unity  in  the  history  of 
Assyria.  Composed  as  it  was,  during  most  of  its  time, 
practically  of  one  enormous  city,  there  is  no  serious  inter- 
ruption in  the  exercise  of  its  peculiar  genius  or  the 
development  of  its  national  character.  As  compared  with 
communities  not  Oriental,  its  existence  was  long,  but  in 
comparison  with  the  Babylonian  monarchies  its  history 

206 


CH.  I,  §  168  THE   ASSYRIAN   PEOPLE  207 

was  brief,  extending,  as  an  independent  empire,  over  less 
than  a  thousand  years,  as  against  the  three  thousand  and 
more  that  measure  the  duration  of  the  southern  kingdoms. 
It  was  also  compact  and  uniform.  No  foreign  conqueror 
ever  sat  on  the  throne,  while  the  foreign  Elamite  and 
Kasshite  dynasties  in  Babylonia  endured  for  centuries. 
Its  predominant  characteristics  as  a  race  and  community 
lie  on  the  surface,  and  are  suggested  even  by  a  cursory 
survey  of  its  monuments  alone.  The  outstanding  attri- 
butes of  the  Assyrian  were  energy  and  the  love  of  power, 
and  these  characteristics  were  so  marked  that  all  other 
qualities  were  dwarfed  in  comparison.  Naturally,  they 
took  the  form  of  militarism,  as  in  other  ancient  countries ; 
but  in  the  case  of  Assyria  it  led  to  a  one-sidedness  so 
complete  that  hardly  anything  else  than  war  and  conquest, 
with  concomitant  and  kindred  pursuits,  are  suggested  by 
its  history  and  its  literature,  its  sculpture  and  decorative 
art.  As  was  the  case  with  other  Semitic  nations,  the 
religiousness  of  the  Assyrians  was  intense  and  extreme, 
and  conquest  was  to  them  a  religious  work,  indeed  the 
very  work  of  their  gods  themselves ;  but  the  satisfaction 
of  the  lust  of  power  and  gain  was  always  the  practical  end. 
And  there  never  was  a  race  more  practical  or  less  imagina- 
tive and,  at  the  same  time,  more  intense  and  aggressive. 
These  qualities  were  exemplified  in  plans  and  modes  of 
action  almost  startling  in  the  perfection  of  their  simplicity 
and  consistency,  and  in  the  remorseless  energy  with  which 
they  were  executed  and  realized.  As  compared  with  the 
old  Babylonian  kingdoms  (not  the  later  Chaldaean  mon- 
archy), they  were  in  many  respects  like  the  Roman  empire 
compared  with  the  Grecian  states.  Though  they  never 
attained  the  faculty  of  organization  and  administration 
which  characterized  the  Romans,  the}'  yet  gave  the  world 
the  first  example  of  a  great  organized  state, —  a  creative 
idea  which  was  ultimately  adopted  by  imperial  Rome  itself 
(§  6).  In  the  genius  for  centralizing,  concentrating,  and 
consolidating  political  power  Nineveh  furnished  a  further 


2U8  ASSYRIAN   CHARACTERISTICS  BOOK  IV 

parallel  to  Rome.  The  comparison  might  be  pursued 
further  still,  since  the  lack  of  creative  and  original  faculty 
in  science,  literature,  and  art  among  the  Assyrians,  as 
contrasted  with  the  Babylonians,  is  just  as  marked  as  the 
same  phenomena  among  the  Romans  in  comparison  with 
the  Greeks.1 

§  169.  On  the  whole,  there  is  at  once  a  singular  fas- 
cination and  repulsiveness  in  the  most  obvious  political 
and  moral  aspects  of  Assyrian  life  and  history.  The 
singleness  and  intensity  of  purpose,  along  with  compre- 
hensiveness and  magnitude  of  aim  and  plan,  the  swiftness 
of  decision  and  energy  of  action,  compel  our  attention  and 
excite  our  admiration.  On  the  other  hand,  the  relentless 
repression  of  all  opposition,  the  disregard  of  the  rights  of 
others,  the  remorseless  cruelty  shown  to  enemies  and 
especially  to  rebels,  and  the  sober  and  sincere  earnestness 
with  which  all  this  was  carried  out  in  the  name  of,  and  in 
obedience  to,  the  gods,  make  us  recoil  with  horror,  even 
though  we  are  conscious  that  the  spirit,  and  many  of  the 
forms,  of  this  odious  religiousness  are  paralleled  elsewhere 
in  ancient  and  modern  times.  The  temper  and  genius  of 
the  nation  are  well  represented  in  the  sculptured  faces  of 
its  kings,  which  one  who  has  seen  can  never  forget.  The 
restless  activity  and  boundless  ambition  of  these  "sub- 
verters  of  the  nations  "  are  only  faintly  represented  in  the 
stony  images.  The  repose  of  the  countenance  is  the 
indication  of  conscious  power  and  not  of  inward  restful- 
ness,  while  there  is  there  an  expression  of  resoluteness 
and  pitilessness  that  excites  in  the  beholder,  even  with 
such  a  wide  interval  of  association,  a  feeling  of  inward 
revolt  and  repugnance  not  unmingled  with  awe.  But 
though  our  judgment  of  the  Assyrians  is  necessarily  harsh, 
as  far  as  the  finer  qualities  of  humanity  are  found  wanting 
in  them  throughout  their  history,  we  must  not  leave  out 
of  sight  certain  qualifying  considerations.  We  must 
remember  that  the  accounts  which  have  come  to  us  mostly 

1  Cf.  Tiele,  BAG.  p.  575. 


CH.  I,  §  171  DIVISIONS   OF   THE    HISTORY  209 

tell  of  deeds  of  war  and  its  concomitant  violence,  and  that 
a  picture  completed  by  the  portrayal  of  the  social  and  civil 
life  of  this  gifted  and  strenuous  people  would -certainly 
show  many  lighter  relieving  colours.  And  we  must  not 
fail  to  look  at  the  history  of  the  nation  from  beginning  to 
end,  and  to  recognize,  reluctantly  as  we  may,  that  it 
fulfilled  its  destiny  and  mission  by  upholding  itself  against 
the  rivals  who,  in  ancient  Semitic  times,  would  else 
inevitably  have  crushed  out  its  existence ;  that  in  vindi- 
cating and  maintaining  and  aggrandizing  itself  it  simply 
used  the  well-approved  methods  of  its  predecessors  and 
contemporaries ;  that  even  the  Hebrews,  before  the  rise 
of  Prophecy,  were  scarcely  more  humane  to  their  stubborn 
foes ;  and  that  the  cruelty  of  Christian  conquerors  up  to 
very  recent  times,  differing  more  in  form  and  expression 
than  in  degree  or  spirit  from  that  of  the  Assyrians,  was 
perpetrated  under  the  light  of  the  religion  whose  very 
essence  is  mercy  and  its  charter  the  message  of  peace  and 
good-will  to  men. 

§  170.  The  history  of  Assyria  has  already  (§  78)  been 
divided  into  three  periods,  which  may  now  be  defined  as 
follows :  — 

I.  The  earliest  period  of  dependence  upon  Babylonia. 
This  division  ends  with  the  establishment  of  a  separate 
kingdom  and  the  rise  of  Nineveh,  c.  1500  B.C. 

II.  The  history  up  to  the  reorganization  of  the  empire 
under  Tiglathpileser  III,  745  B.C. 

III.  The  supremacy  of  Assyria  in  Western  Asia,  745 
B.C.  to  the  fall  of  Nineveh,  G08  B.C. 

§  171.  The  beginnings  of  Assyrian  history  are  involved 
in  obscurity.  If  the  opinion  is  right  which  holds  that  the 
Semites  started  from  the  Arabian  desert  and  moved  north- 
wards, there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  first 
settlers  of  that  race  on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris  came  by 
way  of  Babylonia.  We  should  then  have  to  conclude  that 
the  migration  was  accomplished  at  a  time  long  before  the 
first  dawn  of  known  Semitic  history,  otherwise  the  purity 


210  THE   SETTLEMENT   OF  ASSYRIA  BOOK  IV 

of  race  characteristic  of  the  Assyrians,  as  contrasted  with 
the  Babylonians,  would  be  inexplicable.  We  have  to 
think  of  the  settlement  of  Assyria  somewhat  as  follows. 
Keeping  in  mind  the  general  character  and  direction  of  the 
migrations  of  these  divisions  of  the  North  Semitic  family 
(§  22,  126),  we  observe  that  while  the  Canaanites  and  the 
main  body  of  the  Aramaeans  pursued  a  westerly  path, 
determined  in  general  by  the  course  of  the  Euphrates,  the 
Babylonian  division,  after  "Shumer  and  Akkad  "  (§  110) 
had  been  reduced  to  cultivation,  kept  sending  out  colonies, 
or  offshoots,  to  the  north.1  The  country  to  the  east  of  the 
Tigris  furnished  better  land  for  settlement  than  the  region 
between  that  river  and  the  Euphrates,  and  it  was  accord- 
ingly taken  up  by  the  Babylonians,  who,  in  contrast  to 
their  kindred,  had  completely  abjured  the  nomadic  life. 
We  have  already  seen  (§  92)  that  the  territoiy  north  of 
Baghdad,  stretching  up  to  the  Lower  Zab  (Gutium),  was 
inhabited  about  4000  B.C.  by  a  Semitic-speaking  people. 
The  inhabitants  of  this  region  were,  in  historical  times  at 
least,  not  prevailingly  of  Semitic  stock,  the  intermixture 
having  presumably  come  from  the  Median  mountains. 
Now  the  Lower  Zab  was  the  historical  southern  boundary 
of  the  Assyrian  people,  and  the  assumption  is  natural  that 
they  were  Babylonian  colonists  of  the  same  general  type 
as  those  who  settled  in  Gutium,  preceding  the  latter  in 
their  emigration,  and  maintaining  better  than  they  the 
traditions  and  spirit  of  Semitism  against  the  marauders 
from  the  mountains.  The  very  early  date  above  assigned 
to  the  first  Semitic  settlements  in  Assyria  is  confirmed  by 
the  fact  that  the  city  of  Nineveh,  far  to  the  north  of  the 
country,  was  in  existence  about  3000  B.C.,  trade  being 

1  The  supposition  of  Winckler  (GBA.  p.  149,  cf.  141)  that  North 
Mesopotamia  (Charran)  was  the  centre  of  the  oldest  Babylonio-Semitic 
civilization,  which  thence  spread  southeastward,  is  altogether  improbable 
unless  we  accept  the  hypothesis  of  a  general  Semitic  migration  from  the 
northern  highlands.  For  special  objections,  see  Hilprecht,  OBT.  I,  23  f.  ; 
Jensen  in  ZA.  VIII,  229  f. 


CH.  I,  §  172     ASSHUR   AND   ITS   EARLIEST   RULERS  211 

carried  on  there  with  South  Babylonia,  and  a  temple 
erected  by  the  famous  Nabu  (§  96  f.)  in  honour  of  the 
goddess  Nina  (Ishtar),  from  whom  the  city  was  named. 
Much  earlier  than  this  must  the  city  of  A  sshur l  have  been 
founded,  which,  as  already  mentioned  (§  74),  was  the  first 
seat  of  an  organized  government,  and  from  which  the 
empire  of  Assyria  received  its  historic  name.  This  fact 
may  also  bear  testimony  to  the  immemorial  existence  of 
some  kind  of  nationality,  with  the  city  of  Asshur  as  the 
centre.  The  absence  of  references  in  the  extant  Baby- 
lonian inscriptions  for  many  hundreds  of  years  shows, 
however,  the  comparative  unimportance,  politically,  of  the 
whole  community  until  near  2000  B.C.  It  may  further  be 
taken  for  granted  that  the  colony,  if  we  may  so  term  it, 
was  normally  held  in  a  sort  of  subjection  by  the  ruling 
Babylonian  state  (whenever  it  attained  to  wide  dominion), 
which  would  maintain  the  leading  settlements  as  trading- 
posts  in  the  interests  of  mining  and  fishing. 

§  172.  Such  a  state  of  subjection,  of  whatever  character 
it  may  have  been,  is  perhaps  indicated  by  the  fact  that  the 
earliest  known  rulers  of  Assyria  do  not  call  themselves 
"kings,"  but  "priestly  regents  "  (§  98).  Apparently  the 
straggling  community  did  not  come  under  the  protection 
of  Babylonia  till  the  Elamites  were  expelled,  possibly  in 
the  time  of  the  great  Chammurabi  (§  117).  The  names 
of  several  of  their  rulers,  from  about  2000  u.c.  onwards, 
have  been  preserved,  along  with  the  fact  that  they  zeal- 
ously promoted  the  old  Babylonian  worship.  One  of  them, 
tiamxi-Rammdn  ("Ramman  is  my  sun"),  son  of  Ishme- 
Dagun,  is  alluded  to  long  after  as  a  priestly  regent  who 
had  erected  a  temple  in  Nineveh  to  the  gods  Ann  and 
Kamman.  His  date  is  fixed  at  about  1820  H.C.  by  our 
informant,  Tiglathpileser  I  (§  178  ff.),  who  restored  the 

1  This,  the  name  of  the  national  god,  as  well  as  of  the  city  and  country, 
means  "  bringer  of  prosperity."  The  double  name  may  possibly  recall 
the  pious  gratitude  of  the  earliest  settlers,  as  well  as  their  good  fortune, 
and  thus  explain  the  perpetual  cult  of  the  favourite  deity. 


212  ASSYRIA   AND   EGYPT  BOOK  IV 

temple  the  second  time.1  How  far  he  was  removed  from 
the  first  genuine  "king"  of  Asshur  we  cannot  tell,  nor  is 
it  even  certain  as  yet  to  whom  the  honour  of  having  first 
worn  the  title  is  to  be  assigned.  What  we  learned  about 
the  usage  of  these  designations  of  the  highest  rank,  in  con- 
nection with  the  history  of  South  Babylonia  (§  98),  must 
make  us  cautious  about  asserting  that  the  establishment  of 
the  "kingdom  "  was  equivalent  to  the  assertion  of  inde- 
pendence, though  a  coincidence  between  the  two  is  of 
course  possible.  One  of  the  later  rulers  2  appears  to  think 
that  his  ancestor,  Bel-kapkapu  ("Bel  is  strong"),  was  the 
earliest  of  Assyrian  kings,  while  another  3  distinctly  claims 
the  merit  of  having  changed  the  old  regency  into  a  mon- 
archy for  the  alleged  founder  of  his  line,  Bel-ibni.  In 
view  of  the  subsequent  history,  it  should  be  noted  how 
Nineveh  was  kept  in  mind  by  the  rulers  of  Asshur,  as  we 
learn  not  only  from  the  erection  of  new  structures  there, 
but  also  from  the  restoration  of  the  venerable  ruin  of  the 
temple  of  Ishtar  (Nina),  which  had  been  founded  by  Nabu 
a  thousand  years  before. 

§  173.  For  the  next  two  centuries  there  is  nothing 
known  with  certainty  of  the  fortunes  of  Assyria.  In 
the  second  half  of  the  sixteenth  century  a  welcome  and 
suggestive  side-light  comes  from  Egyptian  history.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  Thothmes  III,  the  most  power- 
ful of  all  the  Pharaohs  (§  145),  received  messengers 
with  presents  from  the  king  of  Assyria.  The  supposi- 
tion that  the  famous  invader  and  conqueror  of  Northern 
Syria  penetrated  also  to  the  banks  of  the  Tigris  can- 
not be  entertained.  Nor  can  we  assume  that  the  terri- 
tory of  Assyria  proper  was  at  any  time  subjugated  by 
Egypt.  The  matter  has  special  interest  for  us  at  present, 
because  it  helps  to  throw  light  upon  the  status  of  Assyria, 
which  was,  in  this  matter,  evidently  acting  in  its  own 

1  TP.  VII,  00-70. 

2  Rammfui-niruri  III,  in  I  R.  35  Xr.  4,  21  ff. 

3  Esarhaddon,  K.  2801 ;  see  Winckler,  GBA.  p.  154  f.,  330. 


CH.  I,  §  174     AFFAIRS   IX   THE    SIXTEENTH   CENTURY  213 

right,  and  was  therefore  probably  either  preparing  to 
secure  complete  independence  of  Babylonia,  or,  having 
already  secured  it,  was  endeavouring  to  enlist  the  support 
of  Eg}-pt  against  a  rival  power.  An  interesting  question 
arises  here  in  connection  with  the  country  intervening 
between  the  Tigris  and  the  Euphrates.  It  is  quite 
impossible  that  it  should  have  been  left  out  of  sight  in 
the  early  aggressive  days  of  Assyrian  independence,  and 
it  is  at  least  a  plausible  assumption  that  the  encroach- 
ments of  Thothmes  upon  Mesopotamia  were  viewed  with 
apprehension  by  the  Assyrian  king,  who  wished  to  guard 
against  their  extension  by  propitiating  the  great  conqueror 
from  the  valley  of  the  Nile.  In  any  case,  it  must  be  un- 
derstood that  Assyria  regarded  itself,  from  the  beginning 
of  its  national  autonomy,  as  the  heir  of  Babylonian  sover- 
eignty in  the  West,  and  it  is  quite  in  accordance  with  the 
present  hypothesis  that  our  definite  information  as  to 
Assyrian  progress  westward  indicates  it  as  the  controlling 
power  in  Mesopotamia. 

§  174.  The  condition  of  affairs  in  Western  Asia  in  the 
sixteenth  century  B.C.  may,  we  think,  be  broadly  sum- 
marized as  follows.  Recalling  what  has  been  said  of  the 
affairs  of  Babylonia,  we  see  that  state  which  had  dominated 
Mesopotamia  and  the  West-land  for  many  centuries,  which 
hud  enriched  herself  by  their  trade  and  civilized  them  by 
her  art  and  literature,  and  even  given  them  her  language 
and  her  writing,  compelled,  after  a  long  and  bitter  struggle, 
to  accept  the  yoke  of  the  wild  Kasshite  mountaineers,  and, 
weakened  and  dismembered  by  the  strife,  constrained  to 
limit  herself  perpetually  to  the  region  of  the  Lower 
Euphrates,  and  leave  the  West-land  an  easy  prey  to  the 
Egyptians  and  the  Hettites.  But  this  Kasshite  conquest 
of  Babylonia  had  fateful  results  in  another  way;  it  pre- 
vented the  consolidation  of  the  eastern  branch  of  the 
Semites  by  alienating  from  Babylonia  the  Assyrian  colon- 
ists, who  at  least  remained  friendly  to  the  mother  state 
until  the  foreign  yoke  was  imposed,  and  the  Semitic  race 


214  KIVALHY   WITH   BABYLONIA  BOOK  IV 

threatened  with  contamination  and  virtual  extinction. 
Not  improbably  the  Elamitic  subjugation  of  Babylonia 
resulted  in  the  expatriation  of  many  of  the  native  patriots 
and  the  consequent  augmentation  of  the  purely  Semitic 
settlement  north  of  the  Lower  Zab;  and  the  traditions  of 
self-sacrificing  loyalty  must  have  lingered  in  the  minds  of 
their  descendants,  who  refused  to  be  coerced  or  de-Semitized 
by  either  Kasshites  or  Gute.  It  was,  perhaps,  the  perpetual 
struggles  for  the  maintenance  of  the  integrity  of  the  colony 
which  gave  to  the  Assyrians  their  historic  fierceness  of 
spirit  and  unbending  will,  and  the  same  qualities  and 
feelings  which  made  them  resist  the  Gute  and  Elamites 
led  them  also  to  break  with  Babylonia,  now  become 
Kasshite.  Henceforth  there  was  almost  perpetual  rivalry 
and  strife  between  Assyria  and  the  parent  country,  in  spite 
of  their  community  of  origin,  of  religion,  and  of  all  the 
elements  of  culture.  Henceforth,  also,  it  is  Assyria  that 
becomes  the  leading  power  in  the  West.  The  first  issue  to 
be  decided  was  which  of  the  two  states  should  control  the 
trade  of  Mesopotamia  and  Syria.1  Assyria  had  the  advan- 
tage in  point  of  nearness,  and  her  position  also  enabled 
her  to  block  the  road  along  the  Euphrates  and  destroy  the 
Babylonian  caravans.  The  result  of  the  struggle  was  that 
not  until  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  capital  (608  B.C.) 
did  any  Babylonian  ruler  appear  in  the  West-land. 

§  175.  Our  next  information  with  regard  to  Assyria  is 
comparatively  full,  and  shows  it  to  have  reached  the  rank 
of  an  acknowledged  rival  of  the  mother-land.  We  learn 
this  from  one  of  the  most  interesting  and  important  docu- 
ments of  Oriental  antiquity,  a  synchronistic  summary2  of 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian  history,  written  from  the  stand- 

1  Winckler's  opinion,  which  assumes  much   closer  relations   between 
Assyria  and  North  Mesopotamia  than  those  above  suggested,  and  even 
maintains  that  the  latter  for  a  time  dominated  the  former,  is  unsupported 
by  anything  we  know  as  yet  of  the  political  development  of  the  River  coun- 
try.    See  his  GBA.  p.  154  ff.,  and  Orientalische  Forschungen,  I,  p.  88  ff. 

2  II  R.  66  ;  III  R.  4.     See  Delitzsch,  Kossder  ;  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  433  ff., 
cf.   479   ff.  ;    "Winckler,  UAG.,  where  the  text   is   autographed  complete 
(p.  14«-ir,2\ 


CH.  I,  §  175  SYNCHRONISTIC    HISTORY  215 

point  of  the  former  nationality.  The  first  notice  from  this 
source  tells  us  that  the  king  of  Assyria,  Asshur-bel-nishe- 
shu  ("Asshur  is  lord  of  his  people,"  c.  1480  B.q.),  and 
the  Kasshite  king  of  Babylon,  Karaindash,  defined  the 
boundary  of  their  respective  territories  and  took  a  mutual 
oath  not  to  transgress  it.  These  peaceful  relations  were 
maintained  by  the  next  two  kings  of  Assyria.  A  change, 
however,  took  place  when  the  fourth  ruler  of  the  line, 
Asshur-uballit  ("Asshur  gives  salvation,"  c.  1410),  gave 
his  daughter  in  marriage  to  the  Babylonian  king,  Burra- 
buriash  (§  149).  But  the  permanent  relations  thus  sought 
were  not  to  be  realized.  On  the  death  of  the  Kasshite 
son-in-law,  the  body-guard  rose  up  against  the  half- 
Assyrian  grandson  who  came  to  the  succession,  and,  having 
put  him  to  death,  raised  one  of  their  own  race  to  the 
throne.  Asshur-uballit  then  invaded  the  country,  de- 
throned the  pretender,  and  set  in  his  place  another  son  of 
Burraburiash  named  "  Kurigalzu  the  lesser  "  (that  is,  the 
second).  The  subordinate  position  of  Babylonia  was  not, 
however,  agreeable  to  the  favoured  monarch,  and  we  find 
him  engaged  in  war  with  Bel-nirari,  the  son  and  successor 
of  Asshur-uballit,  with  results  very  unfavourable  to  him- 
self, since  he  was  defeated  and  had  to  yield  up  a  large 
part  of  his  territory.  This  triumph  was  followed  by 
successes  against  neighbouring  peoples,  under  a  series  of 
rulers  who  set  the  young  ambitious  nation  fairly  on  its 
road  of  self-aggrandizement.  The  position  now  held  by 
Assyria  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that,  at  the  end  of  the 
fifteenth  century,  as  we  learn  from  letters  to  Amenophis 
IV  in  the  El  Amarna  collection  (§  150),  busy  negotia- 
tions were  carried  on  with  the  Egyptian  court.  Bel-niriuT 
himself  followed  the  immemorial  policy  of  the  old  Baby- 
lonian empires,  and  pointed  out  to  his  successors  the  path 
of  glory  and  profit  by  seizing  the  road  to  the  centres  of  the 
Mesopotamia!!  traffic.  Of  his  grandson,  Ramman-nirari  I 
(c.  1325),  we  have  an  inscription  l  of  considerable  length, 

1  IV  R.  44  f.    KB.  I,  4-9  has  transcription  and  translation.    It  was  first 
translated  by  Smith,  Disc.  243  ff .    This  is  the  first  dated  inscription  known. 


210  ASSYRIAN   EXTENSION  BOOK  IV 

which  is  a  main  source  of  our  information  for  all  this 
period.  He  enlarged  the  territory  of  Assyria  southward, 
repelled^the  Gute  and  other  southeastern  tribes,  who  were 
long  to  remain  troublesome  enemies  and  were  always  to 
be  found  on  the  side  of  Babylonia  as  against  the  more 
purely  Semitic  northern  state.  His  great  work  was  not  so 
much  to  extend  the  territory  of  Assyria  as  to  consolidate 
and  attach  more  firmly  to  his  dominion  the  acquisitions  of 
his  predecessors.  By  crippling  the  Kasshites  in  their  own 
mountain  homes  he  struck  at  the  great  source  of  supply 
of  recruits  to  the  Babylonian  armies.  Perhaps  of  more 
importance  still  were  the  deeds  of  his  son  and  successor, 
Shalmaneser  I  (c.  1300),  the  real  founder  of  the  historic 
Nineveh,  who  built  what  was  later  the  southern  suburb  of 
that  centre  of  Assyrian  life  and  power,  the  city  of  Kalach, 
now  the  ruins  of  Nimrud,  an  achievement  referred  to  in 
Gen.  x.  11.  His  warlike  enterprises  were  directed  mainly 
to  bringing  to  subjection  the  Aramaean  tribes  of  Northern 
Mesopotamia,  among  whom  he  planted  Assyrian  colonies. 
The  next  king,  his  son  Tuklat-Adar  I  (c.  1290),  is  named 
"king  of  Shumer  and  Akkad,"  and  therefore  (§  110)  must 
have  become  master  of  Central  Babylonia.  We  may  infer, 
in  fact,  from  an  interesting  statement  of  Sinacherib  600 
years  later,1  that  he  exercised  some  kind  of  sovereign 
authority  in  the  city  of  Babylon  itself. 

§  176.  For  the  next  eighty  years  we  find  the  Assyrians 
quiescent,  and  the  Babylonians  holding  their  former  power, 
though  apparently  not  in  possession  of  Assyrian  territory. 
The  new  capital  at  Nineveh  was  chosen  none  too  soon. 
While  the  city  of  Asshur  was  declining  in  importance, 
and  perhaps  in  the  hands  of  enemies,  Nineveh  served  as  the 
retreat  of  the  enfeebled  Assyrians  of  the  more  southerly 
portions  of  the  kingdom.  The  evidence  of  the  native 
documents  as  to  this  period  is  ominous  as  to  the  condition 

1  III  R.  4  Nr.  2  is  an  inscription  on  a  seal  sent  by  this  king  to  Babylon. 
It  was  found  there  by  Sinacherib,  probably  at  his  second  conquest  of 
Babylon  (689  B.C.),  u  GOO  years  afterwards." 


CH.  I,  §  177         1'KOGKESS   OF   THREE   CENTURIES  217 

of  the  kingdom.1  But  the  results  of  this  first  terra  of 
Assyrian  independence  show  achievements  of  the  utmost 
importance.  In  the  first  place,  Semitism  secured  a  per- 
manent triumph.  The  more  we  study  the  somewhat  obscure 
history  of  these  three  centuries,  the  more  it  becomes  evident 
that  Assyria  represented  the  pure  Semitic  spirit  as  opposed 
to  the  miscegenating  tendencies  which  had  become  inevit- 
able in  Babylonia.  Not  only  did  the  descendants  of  the 
southern  colonists  keep  themselves  intact  by  breaking  the 
power  of  the  earlier  barbarians ;  by  direct  as  well  as 
indirect  influence  they  actually  put  an  end  to  the  undis- 
puted rule  of  the  Kasshites  in  Babylon,  so  that  the  way 
was  prepared  for  their  ultimate  expulsion  or  absorption. 
In  the  second  place,  they  established  outposts  and  founded 
and  maintained  colonies  among  the  Aramaean  districts  of 
Eastern  Mesopotamia,  to  whose  influence  we  may  perhaps 
ascribe  the  fact  that  the  Hettite  conquest  did  not  extend 
into  that  region.  In  the  third  place,  Babylonia  was 
thrust  into  a  secondary  position.  The  situation  and 
enterprise  of  Assyria  excluded  the  mother  country  from 
the  West-land,  without  whose  control  no  state  could  rise 
to  supremacy  in  this  portion  of  Asia.  Though  Assyria 
herself  could  not  as  yet  enter  into  possession,  she  occupied 
the  vantage-ground  and  held  the  keys. 

§  177.  Babylon  soon  regained  her  independence,  and, 
though  often  compelled  to  wage  an  unequal  contest  with 
Assyria,  she  received  no  ruler  from  the  latter  after  Tuklat- 
Adar.  for  GOO  years.  Singularly  enough,  also,  the  Baby- 
lonians never  succeeded  in  bringing  Assyria  under  the 
yoke.  The  intervening  territory  was  the  scene  of  many  a 
conflict;  the  soil  of  each  country  was  ravaged  very  many 
times  by  the  invading  troops  of  the  other,  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  either  capital  was  doubtless  often  only  averted  by 
the  payment  of  heavy  commutations.  An  early  successor 

1  This,  however,  did  not  involve  a  collapse  of  the  empire.  Tributary 
lands  west  of  Mount  Masius  were  kept  true  to  their  allegiance  till  they 
were  overcome  by  the  Moschi  (§  179),  about  1165  B.C.  (TP.  I,  62  ff.). 


218  NEW   DYNASTY   IN   BABYLONIA  BOOK  IV 


of  Tuklat-Adar  fell  in  battle  with  an  unknown  king  of 
Babylon,  and  his  successor  was  for  a  time  shut  up  in  the 
city  of  Asshur  by  Ramman-nadin-ache,  the  powerful  king 
of  the  revived  Babylonian  state  (c.  1200  B.C.),  after  he  had 
unsuccessfully  invaded  the  latter's  territory. 

§  178.  A  new  era  of  prosperity  and  power  for  Assyria 
began  with  the  reign  of  Asshur-dan  (c.  1190  B.C.).  His 
chief  importance  lay  in  the  fact  that  he  made  a  successful 
invasion  of  Babylonia,  without,  however,  as  it  would  seem, 
annexing  any  territory.  His  grandson,  Asshur-resh-ishi, * 
was  an  aggressive  monarch,  pushing  his  conquests  near  to 
the  border  of  Elam,  and  bringing  back  to  their  allegiance 
several  of  the  tribes  of  the  eastern  mountains.  He  also 
undertook  the  task  of  reclaiming  Mesopotamia  and  of 
vindicating  the  claim  of  Asshur  to  the  rightful  rule  of  the 
West-land;  but  its  completion  was  left  to  his  successor. 
His  most  formidable  rival  was  Nebuchadrezzar  I,  king  of 
Babylon,  an  enterprising  warrior  as  well  as  a  vigorous 
ruler  and  administrator,  whose  importance  is  manifest 
from  the  fact  that  he  was  the  founder  of  a  new  dynasty 
Avhich  overthrew  the  regime  of  the  Kasshites.  This  new 
series  of  kings,  who  were  purely  of  native  Semitic  origin, 
reigned  apparently  about  130  years  (c.  1139-1007). 2  Its 
leader,  Nebuchadrezzar,  delivered  the  country  from  the 
deplorable  condition  of  weakness  and  anarchy  to  which  it 
had  sunk  during  the  later  times  of  the  Kasshites.  These 
foreigners  were  now  entirely  deprived  of  place  and  influ- 
ence in  Babylonia,  and  as  they  were  not  nearly  as  powerful 
as  formerly  in  their  mountain  homes,  they  never  regained 
a  position  of  influence.  The  new  dynasty  reasserted  for 
a  time  the  old  historic  claims  of  Babylonia,  and  almost 
succeeded  in  maintaining  them.  Nebuchadrezzar  under- 
took, with  good  fortune,  prolonged  wars  with  the  heredi- 

1  A  brief  inscription  of  his  is  published  in  III  R.  3  Nr.  6.  He  is 
also  mentioned  in  TP.  VII,  43  f . 

2 1  have  adopted  the  estimate  of  Peiser,  ZA.  VI,  268  f.,  and  Hilprecht, 
OB  T.  I,  43  f. 


CH.  I,  §  179     REVIVAL   OF   ANCIENT   ENTERPRISE  219 

tary  enemy  Elam,  chastised  the  Kasshites  in  their  native 
retreats,  and  extended  the  border  of  Babylonia  northward. 
In  the  latter  undertaking  he  of  course  came  in  conflict  with 
the  Assyrians.  His  strife  with  them  was  really  a  contest 
on  a  much  larger  scale  than  would  at  first  appear  from  the 
scanty  notices.  Its  area  embraced  not  only  the  border- 
lands, but  the  whole  of  Mesopotamia,  which  it  would  seem 
that  Nebuchadrezzar  actually  subdued  and,  at  least  for  a 
short  time,  held  under  control,  even  crossing  the  Euphrates 
in  his  victorious  march  westward.  This  magnificent  tri- 
umph was,  however,  but  very  short-lived.  The  effort  was 
without  substantial  backing  in  the  central  state,  and  was 
rather  a  fitful  revival  of  the  ancient  spirit  of  Babylonia 
and  a  reminder  of  its  ancient  glories  than  an  indication 
if  its  permanent  temper  and  achievement.  Larger  and 
smaller  issues  were  alike  decided  by  the  result  of  deter- 
mined intervention  on  the  part  of  Asshur-resh-ishI,  who, 
although  he  was  at  first  compelled  to  retire  within  his  own 
borders,  yet  finally  defeated  Nebuchadrezzar  and  drove  him 
back  to  his  own  land.  The  successors  of  the  latter  in  the 
present  dynasty  were  unable  to  make  any  attempts  at 
conquests  in  Mesopotamia,  and  the  dominion  of  the  West- 
land  was  to  remain  but  a  dream  and  a  memory  in  the 
minds  of  the  Babylonians  for  the  next  500  years.1 

§  179.  We  have  now  to  record  the  principal  achieve- 
ments of  the  next  king  of  Assyria  in  the  regular  line  of 
descent,  the  famous  Tiglathpileser  I,2  one  of  the  most 

1  Our  information  about   Nebuchadrezzar  I  we  get  mainly  from  an 
interesting  state  paper  of   his  own,  published   by    Hilprecht,    Freibrief 
Xebnkadnezars,  1883  (text  and  translation,  with  palffiographic  introduc- 
tion), and  V  R.  55-57.     Another  briefer  document,  of  a  similar  kind,  was 
published  in  S.  A.  Smith's  Assyrian  Letters  IV.  Plates  VIII  and  IX  and 
translated  by  Meissner  in  ZA.  IV,  259  ff.     Both  are  translated  by  Peiser 
in   KB.  Ill,  104  ff.     Hilprecht,  OBT.  I,  p.  38  ff.,  proves  that  he  was  the 
founder   of    his   dynasty,    a  conclusion   supported   by  Oppert  on  other 
grounds,  ZA.  VIII,  302  ff. 

2  The  current  Assyrian  form  Tuklat-pal-esar  ("  My  help  is  the  son  of 
Eshar,"  i.e.  the  god  Adar)  is  itself  an   abbreviation  for  Tuklatl-apal- 


220  TIGLATHPILESER    I   OF   ASSYRIA  BOOK  IV 

striking  figures  of  the  old  Assyrian  times  (c.  1120-1100 
B.C.).  The  first  care  of  this  typical  ruler  of  his  race  was 
to  see  to  the  rebuilding  of  the  old  national  temple  of  Aim 
and  Ramman  in  the  city  of  Asshur,  which  had  lain  in 
ruins  for  sixty  jrears.  He  then  embarked  upon  an  unprece- 
dented career  of  victorious  warfare,  the  first  five  years  of 
which  he  has  himself  detailed.  These  campaigns  were 
conducted  in  the  West  and  Northwest,  and  his  conquests 
and  reconquests,  achieved  with  remarkable  rapidity,  em- 
braced nearly  all  the  regions  north  of  Syria  and  Mesopo- 
tamia, and  between  the  Mediterranean  and  Lake  Van.  Of 
the  peoples  with  whom  he  had  to  do,  we  cannot  omit  to 
mention  the  Moschi 1  (Muske,  the  Meshech  of  Gen.  x.  2), 
who  had  crossed  the  Upper  Euphrates  and  occupied  prov- 
inces tributary  to  Assyria  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
modern  Diarbekr.  To  dislodge  them  he  crossed  Mount 
Masius  and  inflicted  upon  them  such  a  defeat  that  they  are 
not  heard  of  again  in  this  period.  They  were  the  most 
dangerous  of  the  northern  mountaineers,  and  it  is  easy  to 
perceive  that  the  aim  of  his  expedition  was  to  prevent 
them  from  making  a  descent  upon  Mesopotamia  and  Syria. 
Kommagene  (KummuK),  in  the  southeast  of  Cappadocia, 
and  the  northeast  of  Roman  Syria,  was  then  overrun  and 
made  an  integral  part  of  the  empire.  To  the  north  of 
Mount  Masius,  the  tribes  of  the  Kirte  (the  presumptive 
ancestors  of  the  modern  Kurds)  were  reduced  in  rapid 
succession.  Next,  he  overthrew  a  confederation  of  princes 
of  the  Na'iri  on  the  upper  waters  of  the  Euphrates  and 
Tigris,  in  the  southerly  portion  of  the  modern  Armenia. 
Their  territory,  however,  he  contented  himself  with  put- 
ting under  tribute,  for  the  excellent  reason  that  lie  was 
not  prepared  to  administer  it  as  a  portion  of  his  own 
dominions.  The  following  year  witnessed  the  subjugation 

etarri.     Names  of  persons  were  as  a  rule  contracted  by  the  omission  of 
the  final  vowels,  by  the  use  of  the  construct  form,  etc.  —  His  annals  (the 
first  five  years  of  his  reign)  are  published,  I  R.  1-16,  and  often  translated. 
1  For  this  people,  see  especially  KGF.  p.  127-21 3  ;  Par.  250. 


CH.  I,  §  180  CONQUESTS   AND   INVASIONS  221 

of  the  dwellers  on  the  Middle  Euphrates  in  Western 
Mesopotamia.  Here  and  in  Southern  Kommagene  lay  the 
land  once  known  as  Mitani  (§  150),  which  was  now 
reoccupied  by  Aramaean  settlers.  Aramaeans  were  also 
taking  the  place  of  the  Hettites,  even  to  the  west  of  the 
River.  Of  this  great  people,  once  so  terrible  to  Asia  and 
Africa  alike,  there  was  now  little  left  but  the  local  sover- 
eignty of  petty  states  in  Northern  Syria,  which  could  form 
no  barrier  to  the  slow  but  gradual  extension  of  the 
AramsBan  settlements  towards  their  goal  on  the  frontiers 
of  Palestine.  The  old  Hettite  capital,  Carchemish,  was 
left  unmolested,  but  several  Aramaean  strongholds  in  the 
neighbourhood  were  overthrown.  His  fifth  year  was 
devoted  to  expeditions  in  Northern  Cappodocia  and  West- 
ern Armenia.  The  achievements  of  his  first  five  years  he 
summarizes  as  follows:  "A  total  of  forty-two  countries 
and  their  princes  from  the  other  side  of  the  Lower  Zab, 
the  boundary  of  remote  wooded  mountains,  to  the  other 
side  of  the  Euphrates,  the  land  of  the  Hettites,  and  the 
upper  sea  of  the  West,1  from  the  beginning  of  my  govern- 
ment to  the  fifth  year  of  my  reign,  my  hand  overcame ;  one 
mouth  I  made  them  all;2  their  hostages  I  took;  tribute 
and  fines  I  imposed  upon  them."3 

§  180.  The  absence  of  Tiglathpileser  in  these  Northern 
and  Western  wars  appears  to  have  encouraged  the  Baby- 
lonians to  invade  his  territory.  Marduk-nadin-ache,  the 
second  successor  of  Nebuchadrezzar  I,  made  (1107  B.C.)4 
a  successful  inroad  into  Assyria,  plundered  the  city  of 
Ekallati  ("Temple  town,"  probably  near  the  border),  and 
carried  off  two  statues  of  patron  deities,  which  were  after- 
wards recovered  from  Babylon  by  Sinacherib  "418  years 

1  That  is  the  Mediterranean  south  as  far  as  the  Phoenician  settlements 
(cf.  §  331). 

-  That  is  to  say,  he  made  them  of  one  consent  (to  obey  Asshur) . 

3  TP.  VI,  39-48.     The  above  is  given  as  a  sample  of  the  Assyrian 
"historical  "  style. 

4  Sinacherib  furnishes  us  with  the  information  and  the  date,  III  R. 
14,  48  ff . 


222  KIXGLY   ENTERPRISES  BOOK  IV 

afterwards."  Two  defeats  of  the  Babylonians  followed,1 
which  resulted  in  the  Assyrian  monarch  ravaging  their 
country  as  far  as  Babylon,  which  was  apparently  spared 
to  its  king  on  condition  of  his  acknowledging  Assyrian 
suzerainty.  The  passion  of  Tiglathpileser  for  hunting 
has  indirectly  made  us  acquainted  with  a  still  more 
significant  fact.  An  admiring  successor  and  imitator, 
Asshurnasirpal  (§  218  ff.),  commemorating  the  exploits  of 
this  veritable  Nimrod,2  describes  him  as  hunting  and  fishing 
on  the  Mediterranean  coast  and  making  marine  excursions 
in  vessels  of  Arvad.  From  this  we  infer  that  at  least  the 
northern  portion  of  Pho3nicia  was  subdued  by  him,  since 
hunting  was  an  invariable  accompaniment  of  his  campaigns. 
To  complete  the  picture  of  this  representative  Assyrian,  it 
should  be  added  that  his  care  for  the  development  and 
beautifying  of  the  cities  of  the  home  land  was  as  remark- 
able as  his  energy  and  enterprise  in  foreign  wars.  Trees 
yielding  the  best  timber,  which  from  time  immemorial 
were  drawn  from  the  West-land,  he  attempted  to  transplant 
to  Assyria.  He  laid  out  gardens  and  stocked  them  with 
the  best  foreign  fruits  and  vegetables.  He  was  a  zealous 
cattle-breeder,  as  well  as  collector  of  wild  beasts,  spoiling 
his  foreign  possessions  for  both  purposes ;  and  he  filled  the 
granaries  of  Assyria  with  corn.  As  a  builder  of  temples 
to  the  gods  which  he  served  so  zealously  he  ranks  with 
the  first.  The  city  of  Asshur,  which  was  his  principal 
residence,  he  made  again  the  capital,  and  especially  adorned 
it  with  costly  structures.3 

§  181.  For  many  years  after  Tiglathpileser,  Assyria 
seems  to  have  enjoyed  the  blessings  of  peace,  and  even  to 
have  been  on  good  terms  with  Babylonia.  Of  foreign  wars, 
or  in  fact  of  anything  else  thereafter,  no  notice  is  left  us 
for  over  a  century  and  a  half.  This  is  not  merely  to  be 

1  Synchr.  Hist.  col.  II. 

2  I  R.  28  ;  for  other  hunting  adventures,  see  The  Annals,  VI,  58-84. 

3  I  have  dwelt  with  some  fulness   upon   the  career  of   this  monarch, 
because  it  is  that  of  the  first  typical  Assyrian  well  known  to  us. 


CH.  I,  §  181  ASSYRIA    QUIESCENT  223 

explained  on  the  supposition  that  the  records  have  not  yet 
been  discovered.  The  fact  is  clear  enough  that,  while  the 
conquests  that  had  been  made  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Assyria,  for  example  in  Eastern  Mesopotamia,  were  long 
held  in  a  sort  of  subjection,  most  of  the  dependencies  of 
the  empire,  as  Tiglathpileser  had  established  it,  were  one 
by  one  allowed  to  withdraw  because  of  the  want  of  a 
strong  central  power.  The  government  gradually  became 
inefficient  even  at  home,  as  we  know  from  the  condition  of 
things  when  the  light  again  breaks  in  upon  the  obscurity, 
about  the  end  of  the  tenth  century  B.C.  This  period  of 
Assyrian  quiescence  and  temporary  decline  is  the  time  of 
the  rise  of  the  Israelitish  kingdom  and  of  its  division,  as 
well  as  of  the  growth  of  the  various  Aramaean  nationalities 
that  were  built  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Hettite  empire.  It 
will  be  in  place  to  take  a  rapid  survey  of  these  new 
conditions  in  the  Western  country. 


BOOK  V 

HEBREWS,  CANAANITES,  AND  ARAMAEANS 
CHAPTER  I 

TRIBAL    SETTLEMENTS   OF    ISRAEL 

§  182.  OUR  sketch  of  the  history  and  condition  of  Pales- 
tine and  Syria,  drawn  with  the  broadest  lines,  brought  us 
to  the  time  of  the  Exodus  of  the  Hebrews  from  Egypt. 
Our  materials,  gained  almost  entirely  from  the  old  Baby- 
lonian and  Egyptian  monuments,  were  scanty  in  the 
extreme;  but  we  were  able  to  draw  important  general 
conclusions,  and  could  note  especially  some  of  the  provi- 
dential conditions  for  the  establishment  of  Israel  as  a 
people  in  the  Land  of  Promise.  The  main  external  con- 
dition was  that  Palestine  should  not  remain  under  the 
control  of  any  great  overmastering  power  which  would 
crush  out  the  development  of  a  free  national  and  religious 
life.  We  saw  that  the  intermittent  domination  of  the 
West-land  by  the  old  Babylonian  monarchies  was  put  an 
end  to  by  the  crippling  of  Babylon  itself,  first  through  the 
Kasshite  invasions  and  then  through  the  growing  power  of 
its  rival,  Assyria.  Next,  when  the  decline  of  the  Euphra- 
tean  realm  seemed  to  give  the  great  empire  of  the  Nile  free 
play  on  the  Mediterranean  coastlands,  the  Hettites  asserted 
themselves  in  the  North  as  their  competitors,  and  their  pro- 
longed mutual  strife  prevented  either  from  becoming  a 
permanent  proprietor  of  the  coveted  inter-continental  high- 

224 


Cn.  I,  §  183  ISRAEL   IX   THE    DESERT  225 

way;  and  finally,  the  incursions  of  the  barbarians  from  the 
northern  coast  of  the  Mediterranean  and  from  Asia  Minor, 
working  irreparable  damage  upon  Hettites  and  Egyptians 
alike,  left  Palestine  once  more  open.  We  are  now  being 
introduced  to  another  era  in  the  history  of  the  West-land, 
which  shows  an  equally  striking  provision  for  the  chosen 
people.  Assyria  had  arisen  to  be  the  greatest  power  in 
Western  Asia,  and  her  most  powerful  ruler,  as  we  have 
seen,  extended  his  conquests  almost  to  the  verge  of 
Canaan.  The  perpetuation  and  increase  of  this  pre-emi- 
nence would  have  been  fatal  to  the  independent  life  and 
growth  of  any  subject  state,  and  Assyrian  rule  to  the  south 
of  Lebanon  in  the  eleventh  and  tenth  centuries  B.C.  would 
have  meant  religious  and  political  death  to  Israel.  The 
decline  of  the  threatening  monarchy  during  that  period 
which  has  just  been  noted  was  Israel's  opportunity. 

§  183.  The  Exodus,  as  we  have  seen  above  (§  167), 
will  probably  have  to  be  put  about  1200  B.C.  The  events 
and  conditions  of  most  historical  importance  until  the 
entrance  into  Canaan  (c.  11GO  B.C.)  are  easily  enumerated. 
Moses,  the  leader,  already  versed  in  desert  life  and  famil- 
iar with  the  regions  to  be  traversed,  directed  the  march 
at  first  towards  the  holy  mountain-peak  of  Sinai.  The 
road  thither  was  barred  by  one  of  the  leading  Semitic 
tribes  of  the  peninsula,  the  Amalekites,  who  offered  battle 
and  were  defeated.  At  Sinai  the  covenant  with  Jehovah 
was  made  and  ratified,  and  then  a  direct  march  was  made 
upon  Canaan.  The  people,  faint-hearted  by  reason  of 
their  long  slavery,  recoiled  from  the  dangers  of  an  inva- 
sion, and  were  doomed  to  wander  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
their  rendezvous,  Kadesh-Barnea,  till  a  new  generation, 
accustomed  to  independence  and  inured  to  peril,  took 
their  place.  With  these  the  aged  leader  advanced  upon 
the  territory  east  of  the  Jordan.  The  nationalities  kin- 
dred to  Israel  had  already  been  established  in  the  seats 
which  they  were  to  hold  till  Israel  itself  ceased  to  be  a 
nation.  These  were  not  to  be  disturbed  by  the  band  of 

Q 


226  CONQUESTS   EAST   OF   THE   JORDAN  BOOK  V 

invaders.  Edom,  to  the  east  of  Kadesh,  was  avoided  by 
a  detour.  A  large  portion  of  the  territory  of  Moab  south 
of  the  Jabbok,  and  of  Ammon  to  the  north,  had  been 
seized,  and  was  now  ruled  by  a  surviving  colony  of  the 
ancient  Amorites,  who  were  in  the  position  unusual  to 
them  of  administering  a  fairly  large  portion  of  territory 
as  one  principality,  which  stretched  from  the  Arnon  to  the 
Jabbok,  with  Heshbon  as  the  capital.  Sihon,  the  Amorite 
king,  refused  Israel  a  passage  through  his  dominions,  and 
came  out  to  oppose  any  violation  of  his  territory.  In  a 
battle  fought  in  the  border  town  of  Jahaz,  the  invaders 
were  victorious  and  the  Amorites  were  ejected  from  their 
possessions,  which,  with  additional  territory  taken  from 
their  kindred  further  north,  were  divided  among  the 
tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad  and  a  portion  of  Manasseh. 
The  Ammonites  and  Moabites  were  allowed  to  retain 
those  of  their  possessions  which  had  not  been  seized  by 
the  Amorites.  The  Israelites  were  not  further  molested 
east  of  the  Jordan  except  by  intrigues  and  seductive  arts 
on  the  part  of  the  Moabites  and  a  band  of  Midianites  from 
the  south,  who  were  hanging  in  the  rear,  and  these  were 
put  an  end  to  by  the  defeat  of  the  latter.  Moses  soon 
after  died  on  the  old  sacred  mountain  of  Nebo.  Joshua, 
an  Ephraimite,  succeeded  to  the  leadership,  and  the  occu- 
pation of  the  land  of  Canaan  proper,  which  was  the  real 
objective  point,  was  begun. 

§  184.  When  Israel  entered  the  Land  of  Promise  the 
condition  of  the  country  was  not  essentially  different  from 
that  which  marked  it  during  the  later  Egyptian  and  Het- 
tite  regimes,  except  in  the  direction  of  higher  material 
development.  The  Canaanites  who  inhabited  the  central 
highlands  had  long  since  succeeded  in  subduing  to  agri- 
cultural uses  the  rugged  ridges  of  many  of  the  innumera- 
ble hills,  and  by  a  careful  system  of  irrigation  had  made 
the  slopes  and  valleys  also  permanently  productive. 
Under  the  long  quietude  that  followed  the  Egyptian 
invasions  and  the  incursions  of  the  northern  strangers, 


CH.  I,  §  185  CONDITION  OF   CANAAN  227 

prosperity  had  come  to  the  land ;  and  in  their  own  fashion 
these  Canaanites  advanced  in  civilization  like  their  breth- 
ren on  the  Phoenician  coast.  Enriched  especially  by  vine 
and  wheat  culture,  many  of  their  numerous  villages  had 
grown  into  cities,  each  of  them  a  centre  of  independent 
government  (§  37)  having  its  petty  prince  or  "king." 
With  their  advance  in  prosperity  grew  also  their  indul- 
gence in  the  vices  and  various  abominations  which  char- 
acterized the  civilization  and  religion  of  the  Phoenicians 
and  ancient  Semites  generally.  Such  a  people  acting  in 
concert  would  be  powerful  enough  to  resist  an  invasion 
from  a  much  stronger  force  than  Israel  could  muster. 
They  could  only  be  conquered  in  detail,  and  gradually 
supplanted.  Their  history  and  present  political  situation 
rendered  this  comparatively  easy.  As  we  saw  earlier, 
the  genius  of  the  race  ran  towards  the  formation  and  per- 
petuation of  small  independent  communities,  and  the 
many  invasions  of  the  country,  with  frequent  change  of 
masters,  added  to  this  isolating  tendency  an  influence 
which  was  positively  disintegrating.  Moreover,  there 
was  no  possibility  of  outside  alliances  against  the  intru- 
ders. Tyre  and  Sidon,  and  the  other  cities  of  the  coast, 
were  going  their  own  way,  increasing  their  wealth  and 
commercial  connections  by  peaceful  means,  and  were  averse 
to  entangling  foreign  complications.  The  Amorites  east 
of  the  Jordan  were  the  most  formidable  remnant  of  their 
decaying  race,  and  they  had  been  rendered  powerless ; 
while  the  Philistines,  themselves  a  strange  people,  had 
not  yet  grown  into  power. 

§  185.  The  crossing  of  the  Jordan  was  effected  in  the 
place  most  favourable  for  an  invasion.  Jericho,  the  key 
to  the  central  uplands,  was  within  striking  distance  of 
Gilgal,  the  first  station  after  the  passage,  and  was  speedily 
taken.  rAi,  which  next  fell,  after  a  temporary  repulse,  lay 
to  the  northwest,  and  its  capture  secured  to  the  invaders 
the  ancient  patriarchal  seat,  Bethel,  which  became  for  a 
time  the  religious  centre  of  the  new  community.  The 


228  JOSHUA   AND    HIS   WORK  BOOK  V 

country  about  Mount  Ephraim  was  thus  laid  open  to 
them,  and  a  league  procured  by  stratagem  on  the  part 
of  the  inhabitants  of  Gibeon,  gave  them  control  of  that 
more  southerly  city,  and  thus  afforded  them  a  base  of 
operations  against  the  Amorite  chiefs  of  the  hill  country 
of  Judah.  A  combined  attack  by  these  princes  upon 
Gibeon  was  repulsed  in  a  memorable  engagement,  and  the 
flimsy  confederation  scattered.  A  more  formidable  com- 
bination of  the  northern  cities,  formed  slowly  and  too-late, 
in  true  Canaanitish  fashion,  was  also  broken.  With  this 
the  mission  of  Joshua  was  accomplished;  namely,  to  con- 
duct the  tribes  together  into  Canaan  and  secure  in  various 
places  throughout  its  extent  a  foothold  for  each  of  them, 
whence  each  might  proceed  to  appropriate  its  own  posses- 
sions. For  this  end  a  partition  of  the  whole  country  was 
made  in  advance,  and  it  was  to  be  the  aim  of  each  tribe  to 
occupy  what  was  thus  assigned  to  it.  The  death  of  Joshua 
thus  left  the  country  as  yet  only  partially  conquered. 

§  186.  Joshua  had  no  successor  as  the  leader  of  the 
whole  people,  nor  did  the  tribes  act  in  common  against 
an  enemy  for  many  years.  The  work  cut  out  for  each 
was  in  no  case  fully  accomplished.  The  subjugation  of 
the  country  was  a  very  slow  process,  and  was  effected  by 
amalgamation  and  the  survival  of  the  fittest  in  peaceful 
competition  as  much  as  by  war  or  enforced  slavery.  The 
most  noteworthy  acquisition  was  that  made  by  Judah. 
This  tribe  had  received,  during  the  desert  residence,  a 
most  valuable"  addition  in  the  Kenizzites  and  Kenites, 
headed  by  skilled  warriors  and  men  of  action  who,  although 
not  Israelites  by  birth,  contributed  largely  to  the  success 
of  the  new  settlement.  Already,  at  this  early  date  we 
have  indications  of  the  division  between  Judah  and  the 
majority  of  the  other  tribes,  and  it  is  noteworthy  that  the 
entrance  to  the  country  and  the  division  of  the  territory 
for  military  operations  were  made  nearly  upon  the  line 
which  afterwards  became  an  international  boundary.  The 
Ephraimites  occupied  the  midland,  and  partly  from  their 


Cn.  I,  §  187  FORTUNES   OF  THE   TRIBES  229 

position  and  partly  through  their  inherent  strength,  their 
territory  became  the  largest  and  most  important  of  the 
new  nation,  and  it  was,  until  the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom,  the  gathering-point  and  the  place  of  refuge  of 
the  other  tribes.  Its  possession  of  Shiloh,  the  home  of 
the  ark,  and  of  Bethel  and  the  mountains  of  the  Blessing 
and  the  Curse,  along  Avith  other  obvious  advantages,  made 
it  the  most  powerful  of  all  the  great  northern  section  of 
tribes.  We  are  to  think,  however,  of  the  overwhelming 
predominance  of  Judah  and  Ephraim  as  a  matter  of  growth 
and  development.  Other  tribes,  though  from  the  begin- 
ning of  less  importance,  nevertheless  played  a  part  in  the 
fortunes  of  the  period  following  the  occupation,  Benjamin 
especially  showing  great  vitality  and  vigour.  But  the 
progress  of  most  of  them  was  slow  and  doubtful.  To 
secure  protection  it  was  inevitable  that  they  should  iden- 
tify themselves  more  and  more  with  the  stronger  tribes  by 
whom  they  were  gradually  absorbed.  Simeon  was  taken 
up  by  Judah,  as  was  Dan  also  partly,  the  remainder  seek- 
ing finally  a  settlement  to  the  far  north.  Asshur  had  little 
more  than  a  nominal  possession  to  the  northwest,  and 
the  tribes  east  of  the  Jordan  are  rarely  referred  to  later  by 
their  tribal  divisions,  the  geographical  terms  Gilead  and 
Bashan  being  used  by  preference, —  a  proof  that  the  tribal 
autonomy  was  soon  relaxed,  as  was  natural  to  a  race  of 
shepherds  and  cattle-breeders. 

§  187.  The  times  following  the  settlement  are  usually 
regarded  as  showing,  on  the  whole,  political  as  well  as 
religious  and  moral  retrogression.  The  correctness  of 
this  judgment  is  open  to  doubt.  It  was  naturally  a  time 
of  hardship,  the  question  with  the  people  often  being 
whether  they  could  do  even  as  much  as  hold  their  own. 
It  was  also  a  time  of  proof,  as  the  song  of  Deborah  declares, 
and  the  fidelity  of  the  mass  of  the  people  to  their  own 
faith  and  worship  was  often  rudely  shaken.  That  the 
nation,  in  spite  of  this,  succeeded  in  maintaining  itself, 
is  the  significant  matter.  "Their  advance  consisted  in 


230  ARAMAEAN  AND   MOABITE    INVADERS          BOOK  V 

this,  that  the  people  learned  by  perpetual  struggle  to 
defend  valiantly  their  new  home  and  the  free  exercise  of 
their  religion,  and  were  thereby  preparing  for  coming 
generations  a  sacred  place,  where  that  religion  and  national 
culture  might  unfold  itself  freely  and  fully  "  (Ewald). 

§  188.  Each  section  of  the  Israelitish  possessions  was 
in  its  turn  harassed  and  humiliated  by  a  powerful  foreign 
foe,  and  sometimes  the  whole  land  was  temporarily  sub- 
dued. This  latter  was  perhaps  the  case  with  the  first  of 
the  periods  of  subjection,  that  under  Cushanrishathaim, 
king  of  the  Aramaeans  of  Mesopotamia.  The  deliverance 
was  effected,  not  by  a  leader  from  the  northern  border- 
land, but  from  the  extreme  south, —  Othniel,  one  of  the 
later  contemporaries  of  Joshua.  Our  survey  of  Assyrian 
history  shows  that  we  have  to  place  this  event  before  the 
reign  of  Tiglathpileser  I,  and  during  that  long  period 
when  the  quiescence  of  Assyria  enabled  the  people  on 
the  Euphrates  —  the  successors  of  the  old  kingdom  of 
Mitani  (§  179)  —  to  found  a  strong  though  not  long-lived 
independent  state  for  themselves.  The  next  trouble  came 
from  closer  neighbours.  The  passing  away  of  the  great 
leaders  under  whom  the  conquest  of  West  Palestine  had 
been  effected,  encouraged  the  Moabites  to  attempt  to 
subjugate  the  redoubtable  immigrants  whom  neither  the 
arts  of  divination  or  of  intrigue  had  availed  to  cripple  a 
generation  before  (§  188).  The  brunt  of  their  successful 
invasion  and  subsequent  oppression  was  borne  by  the 
southern  tribes.  The  deliverance  came  from  a  Benjamin- 
ite,  Ehud,  who  after  daringly  assassinating  the  king  of 
Moab  in  his  own  palace,  returned  over  the  Jordan,  and 
as  a  representative  of  the  strong  intermediary  tribe  roused 
both  Ephraim  and  Judah  to  decisive  and  successful  action 
against  the  common  foe.  Meanwhile  the  native  Canaanites 
of  the  midland  and  north  had  been  recruiting  their  shat- 
tered strength,  and  seizing  the  opportunity  afforded  by 
Israel's  weakened  condition,  they  made  a  last  and  tem- 
porarily successful  attempt  to  suppress  the  hated  colonists. 


CH.  I,  §  189  CANAANITES   AND   MIDIANITES  231 

The  weakness  of  Israel,  ultimately  clue  to  their  apostasy 
from  Jehovah  (Jucl.  v.  8),  was  directly  owing  to  the 
invariable  and  necessary  consequence  of  such  infidelity, 
decline  of  patriotism,  and  of  faith  in  the  mission  and 
future  of  the  race.  The  tribes  were  disunited  and  help- 
less, and  in  the  roll  of  honour  immortalized  in  the  song 
of  Deborah,  Judah  himself  is  conspicuous  by  his  absence. 
The  faith  and  enthusiasm  of  the  Jeanne  d'Arc  of  Israel, 
the  "prophetess"  Deborah,  and  the  skill  and  energy  of 
Barak,  the  general  whom  she  chose  to  lead  a  hastily  mus- 
tered host,  were  the  chief  factors  of  the  triumph  which 
broke  forever  the  power  of  the  Canaanites,  and  gave  a 
respite  of  rest  and  prosperity  to  the  harassed  Israelites. 

§  189.  The  peace  of  the  land  was  next  interrupted  by 
outside  enemies.  Bands  of  marauders  belonging  chiefly 
to  the  race  of  Midian,  the  most  widespread  of  the  southern 
and  eastern  desert  tribes,  ravaged  the  greater  part  of 
Israelitish  territory,  and  reduced  it  to  an  extreme  of 
poverty  and  misery.  From  this  condition  help  came 
from  the  divinely  guided  force  and  valour  of  a  patriotic 
young  farmer  of  Western  Manasseh.  The  same  northern 
tribes  who  had  been  foremost  in  following  Barak  now 
sent  their  choicest  men  to  join  the  standard  of  Gideon. 
The  spirit  of  the  masses  had,  however,  been  so  thoroughly 
broken  by  oppression  that  more  than  one-half  of  the  mus- 
ter took  advantage  of  leave  to  retire,  and  of  the  ten  thou- 
sand remaining  but  three  hundred  were  chosen  as  most 
meet  to  face  the  enemy.  The  panic  and  defeat  of  the 
marauders  that  followed  their  onset  were  increased  by 
additions  to  the  pursuers  furnished  from  the  Ephraimites, 
whose  restless  jealousy  of  the  more  eager  and  patriotic 
northern  tribes  was  appeased  by  judicious  speech  and  bear- 
ing on  the  part  of  Gideon.  As  to  Judah  we  hear  nothing, 
nor,  indeed,  do  we  read  that  that  tribe  took  any  further 
part  in  the  defence  or  relief  of  the  common  heritage.  The 
victory  and  deliverance  wrought  by  Gideon  were  so  com- 
plete that  the  grateful  people  offered  him  a  dictatorship. 


232  A   PREMATURE    KINGLET  BOOK  V 

This  he  refused;  but  his  influence  over  them  remained 
unbounded  till  his  death,  and  was  increased  by  his  making 
his  family  seat  a  centre  of  religious  services,  to  which  all 
the  tribes  learned  to  resort.  So  great  was  his  prestige 
that  his  son  Abimelech  had  no  difficulty  in  getting  him- 
self proclaimed  "king,"  even  after  his  murder  of  nearly 
all  his  brethren.  The  fact  that  this  cruel  usurper  could 
rule  for  three  years,  even  over  a  limited  territory,  is  a 
striking  commentary  on  the  condition  of  Israel  in  these 
days  of  probation.  The  most  important  event  of  his  brief 
reign  was  his  destruction  of  the  half-Canaanitish  city  of 
Shechem,  which  at  first  welcomed  his  authority  and  then 
was  instigated  to  rebellion.  The  renovated  city,  which  was 
to  play  a  great  r61e  in  coming  days,  now  became  purely 
Israelitish,  and  thenceforth  came  under  the  tribal  or  gen- 
eral authority;  so  that  we  hear  no  more  of  that  strange 
contradiction  to  Hebraic  custom  offered  by  a  city  choosing 
its  own  prince  or  supreme  ruler  (cf.  §  49).  The  death  of 
Abimelech,  during  the  siege  of  another  insurgent  fortress, 
put  an  end  also  to  ventures  in  king-making  on  any  but  a 
national  scale.  The  times,  however,  were  clearly  growing 
ripe  for  the  larger  experiment. 

§  190.  The  next  term  of  subjection  to  foreign  invaders 
was  of  moment  to  Israel  both  east  and  west  of  Jordan.  It 
has  been  already  remarked  that  the  settlements  east  of 
Jordan  did  not  long  maintain  their  tribal  relation  as 
steadfastly  as  the  majority  of  those  on  the  west.  The 
difference  in  their  respective  situations  had  much  to  do 
with  this.  In  the  first  place,  they  were,  in  large  measure, 
cut  off  from  the  main  current  of  national  life.  In  the 
second  place,  their  lot  was  cast  among  peoples  who  were 
far  more  formidable  than  the  Canaanites,  by  reason  of  their 
more  highly  developed  political  organization.  Moab  and 
Ammon  were,  in  fact,  nations  unlike  either  Canaanites  or 
Amorites,  of  whom  we  now  hear  no  more  as  disturbers  of 
the  peace  of  Israel.  Hence  the  maintenance  of  any  large 
association  east  of  the  Jordan  was  out  of  the  question. 


On.  I,  §  191  INVASION   OF   AMM<  >NITES  233 

Separate  cities,  controlling  tracts  of  valuable  pasture-land 
or  plantations,  might  be  and  were  held  by  descendants  of 
Jacob,  but  their  preservation  depended,  as  we  see  in  later 
history  (for  example,  the  case  of  Jabesh-Gilead),  on  their 
being  able  to  keep  up  direct  communication  with  the 
consolidated  power  on  the  west,  and  the  ability  of  the 
latter  to  protect  them  against  any  foreign  foe.  We  must, 
therefore,  keep  the  general  fact  in  mind  that,  while  Israel- 
it  ish  settlements  on  the  east  did  not  cease  to  exist  till 
Assyrian  times,  their  incorporation  in  the  state  as  a  whole 
was  only  fully  realized  under  the  most  powerful  of  the 
later  kings.  After  the  disruption  of  the  monarchy  they 
are  found  only  associated  with  the  northern  kingdom.  A 
glance  at  the  map  will  show  how  this  was  necessarily  the 
case. 

§  191.  The  Ammonites,  whose  territory  lay  to  the  east 
of  Gad  and  Gilead,  took  advantage  of  the  depressed  con- 
dition of  Israel  to  seize  the  settlements  east  of  the  Jordan, 
including  the  "villages  of  Jair,"  whose  founder  and 
administrator  (Jud.  x.  3  ff.)  had  in  an  earlier  time  secured 
the  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  district.  They  then  began 
to  pass  over  and  reduce  the  western  country  as  well.  A 
deliverer  never  failed  to  arise  in  the  time  of  Israel's  great- 
est distress ;  and  now  an  avenger  appeared  in  the  person 
of  a  recalled  and  rehabilitated  outlaw  named  Jephthah, 
a  Gileadite,  in  whom  heroic  and  lofty  courage  was  mixed 
with  superstition  and  rashness,  and  whose  character  and 
actions  afford  a  good  index  to  the  beliefs  and  manners  of 
the  times.  Under  his  leadership,  and  after  a  fruitless 
negotiation  undertaken  by  him,  the  Ammonites  were  at- 
tacked and  defeated,  and  dislodged  from  all  their  newly 
acquired  possessions  as  far  as  the  borders  of  Moab.  The 
sequel  of  this  victory  marred  the  glory  of  the  triumph. 
The  leading  tribe  of  Ephraim  once  more  manifested  both 
unreadiness  and  jealousy,  and  being  too  late  in  sending 
their  forces  to  be  of  help  to  Jephthah  they  accused  him  of 
selfish  ambition  in  ignoring  them.  Jephthah  was  of  a  dif- 


234  THE   PHILISTINES  BOOK  V 

ferent  temper  from  Gideon,  and  instead  of  using  smooth 
and  politic  words  he  accepted  their  implied  offer  of  battle, 
and  this  first  bloody  outbreak  of  intertribal  strife  ended  in 
the  overthrow  and  humiliation  of  Ephraim.  The  stern 
and  rugged  deliverer  kept  order  for  only  six  years  in  the 
territory  he  had  saved. 

§  192.  Meanwhile  a  struggle  had  begun  in  the  south- 
west with  the  most  formidable  foe  yet  encountered,  which 
was  to  last  for  several  generations,  and  to  end  with  the 
undisputed  predominance  of  Israel  throughout  Palestine. 
The  Philistines,  as  already  indicated  (§  166),  were  prob- 
ably a  survival  of  the  invasion  from  the  shores  and  islands 
of  the  Mediterranean,  which  took  place  in  the  closing  days 
of  the  residence  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt.  On  the  low- 
lying  coastlands  they  gained  a  permanent  foothold,  and 
established  their  sway  from  the  historic  Egyptian  frontier 
south  of  Gaza  to  beyond  Joppa  northward.  Their  race  and 
origin  have  long  been  a  matter  of  dispute,  and  it  may  be  that 
the  final  word  on  the  subject  cannot  }-et  be  spoken.  They 
came  from  Caphtor,  which  very  probably  means  Crete ;  at 
any  rate,  a  portion  of  the  Philistines  are  known  as  Cretans.1 
That  they  were  of  Semitic  origin  may  fairly  be  called  in 
question,  though  when  they  come  fully  before  us,  in  the  days 
of  the  later  Judges,  they  seem  to  have  been  pretty  well 
Semitized.  The  favourite  theory  at  present  about  them  is 
that  they  were  the  descendants  of  a  Semitic  colony  formerly 
settled  in  Crete.  This  is  on  the  face  of  it  a  very  improb- 
able supposition,  to  judge  by  what  we  know  of  Semitic 
migrations.  Moreover,  the  arguments  in  evidence  of  a 
Semitic  origin  are  hardly  strong  enough  for  presumptive 
proof.  They  may  veiy  readily  have  acquired  and  used  the 
language  of  Canaan,  and  have  superadded  important  ele- 
ments of  Semitic  religion  to  their  own;  but  this  would 
have  been  done  by  any  foreign  uncivilized  settlers  among 


1  Though  specially  used  of  David's  body-guard,  the  word  TTC  has  in  1 
Sam.  xxx.  14,  Ezek.  xxv.  16,  Zeph.  ii.  5,  a  tribal  and  territorial  application. 


CH.  I,  §  193         THEIR    DEVELOPMENT   IX   CANAAN  235 

such  a  population  as  that  of  Palestine  at  that  period.  The 
strongest  evidence  of  a  foreign  origin  is,  I  think,  the  char- 
acter of  their  political  organization,  which  at  first  was 
non-Semitic  in  character  and  afterwards  conformed  to  the 
Canaanitic  pattern.  At  the  time  of  their  earliest  syste- 
matic conflicts  with  Israel,  they  were  a  confederation  of 
cities  (§  54),  each  with  its  own  king  or  lord,  and  three  cen- 
turies later  each  of  these  members  of  the  union  had  become 
an  entirely  independent  state.  Their  chief  cities  were  five 
in  number:  Ashdod,  Askelon,  Gaza,  Ekron,  and  Gath.  At 
the  time  of  the  Israelitish  invasion  of  Canaan  they  do  not 
appear  by  name,  though  Judah  is  mentioned  (Jud.  i.  18) 
as  having  taken  some  of  these  cities.  This  is  evidence  of 
their  comparatively  late  arrival  in  Canaan  and  of  their 
gradual  extension  and  growth  in  power.  We  soon  hear 
of  them  being  engaged  in  a  border  raid,  and  of  being 
repulsed  with  great  loss  by  a  Hebrew  leader  named 
Shamgar,  with  the  use  of  very  primitive  weapons. 

§  193.  Their  later  attacks  were  more  successful,  and 
they  made  at  least  all  the  west  of  Judah  subject  to  them. 
They  also  crippled  the  family  of  Dan  so  severely  that  these 
were  excluded  from  their  small  precarious  settlements  in 
the  southwest  and  sought  a  home  in  the  far  north,  which 
they  secured  by  summarily  making  an  end  of  the  quiet 
and  inoffensive  inhabitants.  Before  the  departure  of  the 
Danites,  however,  and  while  their  small  encampment 
remained  half-way  between  Jerusalem  and  the  Sea,  they 
furnished  a  defender  and  popular  hero  to  the  oppressed 
Hebrews.  Samson  was  a  "  judge  "  quite  unique  among  his 
class.  His  services  to  Israel  consisted  in  the  performance 
of  single  actions  of  heroic  daring,  resulting  in  the  whole- 
sale destruction  of  bands  of  the  Philistines  —  the  last  of 
them,  which  brought  about  his  own  death,  being  the  most 
spectacular  and  effective  of  them  all  —  rather  than  the  suc- 
cessful expulsion  or  subjugation  of  organized  forces  of  the 
enemies  of  his  people.  His  life,  and  even  his  death,  which 
occurred  twenty  years  after  he  had  begun  his  career  of 


236  THE   PHILISTINES   AND   ISRAEL  BOOK  V 

defiance  and  open  revolt,  were  therefore  without  great 
political  significance ;  and  the  fortune  of  war  continued  to 
be  on  the  side  of  the  well  organized  and  equipped  Philis- 
tines, who  soon  began  to  have  dreams  of  wider  conquest, 
to  be  realized  in  the  subjection  of  the  northern  tribes  as 
well.  This  brings  us  to  the  most  critical  and  at  the  same 
time  the  most  heroic  and  stirring  period  in  the  histoiy  of 
Israel,  when  the  life  of  the  people  was  renewed  on  a 
grander  scale,  and  a  nation  of  infinite  promise  and  potency 
arose  on  the  ruins  of  a  community  distracted  and  torn  from 
within  and  without,  and  hopeless  and  humiliated  to  the 
last  degree  (Jud.  xix.-xxi.). 

§  194.  The  chances  of  success  must  have  seemed  to  be 
with  the  Philistines.  They  had  the  advantage,  above  all, 
of  unity,  and  the  aggressiveness  of  a  vigorous,  self- 
conscious  nationality.  Beside,  while  they  had  in  their 
front  scattered  remnants  of  unsubdued  Canaanites,  who,  if 
not  neutral,  would  certainly  seek  to  injure  the  Hebrews, 
they  had  in  their  rear  110  enemies  at  all.  On  the  other 
side,  Israel  was  apparently  ruined  by  its  inveterate  internal 
strife,  which  had  just  resulted  in  the  almost  total  destruc- 
tion of  the  Benjaminites,  and  was,  moreover,  hard-pressed 
by  enemies  on  every  hand.  And  so  the  attacks  of  the 
Philistines  in  full  force  seemed  to  foretoken  the  utter  ruin 
of  Israel.  After  a  first  repulse,  the  ark  of  Jehovah  was 
brought,  as  a  last  resort,  from  its  seat  in  Shiloh;  but  its 
presence  did  not  save  the  army,  which  Avas  almost  annihi- 
lated at  Aphek,  near  Mizpah.  The  prolonged  absence  of  the 
ark  among  the  Philistines  suggests  to  us  in  the  strongest 
possible  manner  the  degradation  of  the  whole  community 
during  the  following  years.  A  triumph  over  the  Philis- 
tines on  the  same  battle-field,  after  the  return  of  the  ark, 
gave  them  a  temporary  reprieve,  but  this  was  again  fol- 
lowed by  Philistian  domination,  which  extended  so  far 
that  they  brought  under  their  control  the  whole  centre  and 
south  of  Israel,  established  their  headquarters  in  Geba  in 
Benjamin,  and  even  terrorized  the  people  into  the  disuse 


CH.  I,  §  194  HUMILIATION   OF   ISRAEL  237 

of  military  weapons.  From  this  situation  the  land  was 
rescued  through  a  marvellous  combination  of  providential 
circumstances,  which,  after  a  long  and  doubtful  conflict, 
finally  led  to  the  subjugation  of  the  Philistines  and  the 
consolidation  of  the  Israelites  into  a  new  nation,  under  a 
new  form  of  government. 


CHAPTER  II 

FOUNDING  OF  THE  HEBKEW  MONARCHY 

§  195.  THE  welding  of  the  disorganized  tribal  com- 
munities of  Israel  into  one  administrative  whole  was 
accomplished  along  with  and  through  the  rise  and  progress 
of  an  internal  movement  among  the  people  of  a  far  more 
profound  and  far-reaching  character.  The  chief  proximate 
influence  in  the  establishment  of  the  monarchy  was  the 
new  Prophecy,  which  led  to  a  development  of  spiritual  life 
and  enthusiasm,  and  their  wise  direction  to  practical  poli- 
tical ends,  — a  combination  never  elsewhere  in  the  world's 
history  so  successfully  made,  not  even  in  cases  where 
Israel's  history  has  been  emulated  as  a  precedent.  It  fell 
to  the  lot  of  Samuel,  the  first  and  one  of  the  greatest  of  the 
political  prophets,  to  give  to  the  new  religious  movement 
convergence  and  force.  The  time  had  evidently  come 
(§  50)  when  the  demand  of  the  harassed  and  discontented 
people  for  a  king,  or  perpetual  dictator,  could  not  remain 
any  longer  unheeded.  A  theocratic  commonwealth,  with 
Jehovah  himself  as  the  head  and  earthly  ruler,  was  found 
to  be  impracticable.  The  government  through  "  Judges  " 
(§  51)  was  itself,  in  many  cases,  only  a  compromise  with  the 
monarchical  principle,  and  it  had  not  succeeded  (2  Sam. 
vii.  10,  11).  Even  the  union  of  civil  and  religious  func- 
tions in  the  hands  of  Eli,  the  best  and  most  revered  of  the 
Priests,  had  ended  in  signal  failure,  through  the  degeneracy 
of  the  noblest  of  the  sacerdotal  families,  illustrating  and 
typifying  as  it  did  the  moral  decline  of  the  nation  that  was 
to  be  wholly  devoted  to  Jehovah.  There  was,  therefore,  no 

238 


CH.  II,  §  196     THE    BEGINNING   OF   THE    KINGDOM  239 

refuge  but  a  resort  to  monarchy.  But  this  was  not  to  be 
adopted  as  an  ideal;  indeed,  it  was  just  the  reverse  of  this. 
It  was  to  be  granted  as  a  necessity  of  the  situation,  and 
the  people  whose  shortcomings  had  created  such  a  necessity 
were  shown  to  be  responsible  for  the  failures  of  the  past, 
and  warned  against  the  delusion  that  the  mere  appointment 
of  a  king  would  save  a  state  given  over  to  impiety  and 
infidelity  (§  52). 

§  190.  The  emergency  called  for  a  man  of  courage, 
military  talent,  and  popular  gifts.  Samuel  was  directed 
to  make  a  private  and  then  a  public  choice  of  Saul,  a  man 
of  property  and  family  influence,  a  native  of  Gibeah. 
Belonging,  as  he  did,  to  Benjamin,  his  appointment  had 
not  only  the  effect  of  bringing  to  the  front  again  that 
terribly  smitten  and  dejected  tribe,  but,  what  was  of  more 
consequence,  it  transferred  the  leading  place  from  the 
centre  to  the  south  of  Israel,  and  thus  enlisted  the  reserve 
force  of  Judah,  a  tribe  which  had  not  as  yet  taken  any 
prominent  or  serious  part  in  national  affairs.  But  the 
Philistines  pressed  heavily  upon  the  centre,  upon  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh,  as  well  as  upon  the  south,  and  if  these 
tribes  were  to  be  preserved  they  would  be  obliged  to  come 
under  the  leadership  of  Benjamin,  against  which  they  were 
lately  arrayed  in  desperate  strife,  and,  moreover,  to  act  in 
concert  with  their  brethren  of  the  south  as  one  united 
body.  Providentially,  the  first  action  taken  by  Saul  —  the 
rescue  of  the  men  of  Jabesh  in  Gilead  from  impending 
destruction  at  the  hands  of  the  Ammonites  —  could  not 
fail  to  help  on  the  spirit  of  unity,  since  the  march  north- 
ward and  eastward  lay  through  the  territory  of  the  tribes 
whose  conciliation  was  the  most  necessary  and  the  most 
difficult.  After  the  defeat  and  dispersion  of  the  Ammon- 
ites, and  the  adhesion  of  Gilead  to  the  new  kingdom,  it 
was  felt  that  the  time  had  come  for  decisive  action  against 
the  Philistines.  In  this  task  Saul  found  an  able  and, 
indeed,  an  indispensable  seconder  in  his  son  and  pre- 
sumptive successor,  Jonathan,  the  most  heroic  and  engag- 


240  JONATHAN   AND   DAVID  BOOK  V 

ing  personality  in  the  annals  of  ancient  Israel.  Jonathan 
surprised  and  overcame  the  military  post  at  Geba,  and 
then,  when  the  Philistines  appeared  in  force  to  chastise 
the  feeble  nation,  which  they  had  expected  to  keep  under 
with  a  small  garrison,  he  put  their  host  into  a  panic  by 
an  act  of  supreme  daring,  accompanied  as  he  was  by  his 
armour-bearer  alone.  The  rout  which  followed  relieved 
Israel  of  the  immediate  presence  of  foreign  invaders,  though 
the  Philistines  did  not  abandon  their  designs  against  an 
enemy  whom  they  had  once  learned  to  despise. 

§  197.  For  a  time  success  attended  Saul,  at  least  in  the 
affairs  of  war.  The  hereditary  enemies  of  Israel  to  the 
east  and  south  were  held  in  check,  and  the  southern  border 
of  Judah  was  relieved  from  its  most  formidable  scourge  by  a 
successful  and  sanguinary  expedition  against  the  Amalek- 
ites.  Saul,  however,  was  merely  a  military  leader;  his 
civil  administration  was  not  successful,  and  under  him  the 
theocratic  kingdom  could  not  be  maintained.  "A  man 
after  Jehovah's  mind  "  was  being  trained  to  take  his  place. 
David,  a  young  shepherd  skilled  in  music,  of  Bethlehem 
in  Judah,  was,  on  account  of  this  accomplishment,  brought 
to  the  court  of  Saul,  where  he  became  his  favourite  min- 
strel. Later  he  distinguished  himself  by  slaying  a  Philis- 
tine champion  in  single  combat,  and  proved  himself  also  an 
adroit  man  of  affairs.  He  became  the  friend  of  the  noble, 
unselfish  Jonathan,  and  the  idol  of  the  people.  His  pop- 
ularity excited  the  jealousy  of  Saul,  whose  active  enmity 
exiled  him  from  the  neighbourhood  of  the  court.  He 
gathered  around  him  a  band  of  discontented  roving  youths, 
who  with  him  made  a  living  as  best  they  could  in  the  wilds 
of  the  territory  of  Judah.  Still  followed  by  Saul,  he 
finally  transferred  his  allegiance,  with  his  following,  to 
the  Philistian  king  of  Gath.  Here  he  was  allowed  a 
free  hand,  and  he  found  occasion  to  serve  his  brethren  of 
Southern  Judah,  and  at  the  same  time  his  own  interest, 
by  repelling  and  spoiling  various  marauding  tribes,  which 
from  time  immemorial  had  rendered  the  settlement  of  that 
part  of  the  country  an  impossibility. 


CH.  II,  §  199      OVERTHROW   OF    SAUL'S    KINGDOM  241 


§  198.  Meanwhile  it  was  faring  ill  with  the  young 
monarchy  and  its  head.  The  secession  of  David  and  his 
men,  and  the  relaxing  of  Saul's  authority  generally, 
weakened  the  kingdom  vitally.  The  Philistines,  who 
since  their  last-mentioned  defeat  had  met  with  another 
repulse,  in  consequence  of  the  victory  of  David  over  their 
champion,  still  kept  up  aggressive  warfare,  and  were  now 
concentrating  their  forces  in  the  central  region  of  Ephraim 
and  Manasseh.  Saul's  last  campaign  was  directed  against 
this  deadly  assault,  and  he  met  the  enemy  on  the  line  of 
the  historic  march  of  invasion,  in  the  plain  of  Jezreel, 
which  had  now  become  to  the  Philistines  a  well-accus- 
tomed road.  The  brave  ill-fated  kino-  was  forced  to  retreat 

o 

fighting,  till  he  was  pressed  as  far  as  the  northern  side  of 
Mount  Gilboa.  Here  his  troops  made  a  stand,  but  in 
vain.  Their  overthrow  was  complete,  and  Saul  himself, 
after  the  death  by  his  side  of  Jonathan  and  his  brothers 
next  in  age,  sought  the  same  refuge  from  the  ignominy  of 
capture.  He  died  not  ingloriously ;  for  he  was  to  the  end 
a  Hebrew  patriot,  and  the  faithful  defender  of  the  realm 
which  he  was  called  from  out  of  modest  and  congenial 
obscurity  to  rule  and  save. 

§  199.  It  will,  perhaps,  be  well  to  take  here  a  brief 
review,  emphasizing  a  few  points  of  political  moment. 
First,  as  to  the  chronology  of  the  period.  Saul's  death 
may  be  put  down  nearly  at  1000  B.C.  We  get  this 
approximate  date  by  working  backwards  from  the  known 
times  of  later  kings.  As  we  have  seen  (§  167),  the  date 
of  the  Exodus  and  the  subsequent  entrance  into  Canaan 
could  only  be  inferred  from  supposed  contemporary  Egyp- 
tian events.  The  intervening  period  of  the  "Judges"  it 
is  impossible  to  divide  in  order  of  succession,  as  we  do  not 
know  how  many  of  them  may  have  ruled,  at  least  partly, 
at  the  same  time.  Next,  as  to  the  character  of  Saul's 
kingdom  and  its  relation  to  the  government  of  the  Judges 
(cf.  §  49,  51).  We  must  not  be  led  astray  by  the  use  of 
the  word  "king,"  and  suppose  that  anything  like  a  radical 


242  THE   NEW   KINGDOM   AND   THE    TRIBES          BOOK  V 

transformation  was  effected  in  the  relative  position  of  the 
ruler  and  the  ruled.  The  kingship  of  Saul  was  a  very 
different  thing  from  that  of  the  later  kings,  and  even  from 
that  of  his  first  successor.  He  Avas  still  very  much  of  a 
"judge,"  only  his  authority  was  acknowledged  by  all 
Israel,  and  the  title  and  authority  of  king  were  to  be 
hereditary.  Saul's  growth  into  the  new  dignity  was 
gradual,  and  always  incomplete.  At  first  he  returns  to 
his  farm  after  the  repulse  of  the  Ammonites,  and  to  the 
end  he  seems  more  like  an  Homeric  chieftain  than  the 
monarch  of  a  self-conscious  nation.  His  court  and  ways 
of  life  were  simple  in  the  extreme.  The  main  cause  of 
this  was  not  merely  that  the  situation  was  new,  but  that 
Israel  was,  strictly  speaking,  as  yet  no  nation.  It  is  thus 
quite  natural  that  we  hear  of  no  standing  army ;  that  war, 
the  main  public  business  of  the  time,  was  waged  by  hasty 
and  temporary  levies ;  that  there  was  no  cabinet  or  council, 
no  ministry  of  state,  not  even  any  governors  over  subordi- 
nate districts.  David,  who  introduced  these  and  other 
essentials  of  permanent  government,  was,  in  fact  if  not  in 
name,  the  first  king  of  Israel. 

§  200.  Let  us  now  look  at  the  tribes  of  Israel  and  the 
several  communities  throughout  Palestine.  In  the  times 
of  the  Judges  we  found  one  section  of  the  newly  settled 
territory  after  another  coming  to  the  front,  and  asserting 
itself  through  its  leading  man.  As  we  saw,  some  of  the 
tribes  are  scarcely  represented  in  any  common  action  on  a 
large  scale,  and  these  soon  drop  out  of  sight  entirely. 
Throughout  the  whole  period,  the  tribes  which  occupied 
or  bordered  upon  the  hilly  central  region  called  Mount 
Ephraim,  held  the  foremost  place.  The  arena  of  decisive 
action  may  be  observed,  however,  to  gradually  shift  towards 
the  south,  and  with  the  choice  of  Saul  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin takes  the  lead.  It  is  noteworthy,  further,  that  the 
most  southerly  of  the  great  tribes  was  being  built  up  by 
Saul's  young  rival,  whether  designedly  or  unconsciously, 
so  that,  on  the  decline  of  the  Benjaminite  regime,  Judah 


CH.  II,  §  201     SURVIVAL   OF   CLANS   AND    FAMILIES  243 

was  ready  to  make  good  its  claims  through  David.  In 
this  we  have  a  suggestion  of  the  internal  movements  and 
motives  that  helped  to  determine,  through  their  increasing 
influence,  the  world-wide  issues  of  the  later  times,  with 
which  our  main  interest  lies.  The  Canaanites,  whom  we 
saw  everywhere  among  the  new  settlers  of  the  beginning 
of  the  period,  are  still  to  be  found  here  and  there  at  the 
end;1  but  they  had  lost  all  prestige,  with  what  little 
cohesiveness  they  once  possessed,  and  were  rapidly  being 
absorbed.  They  no  longer  prevented  the  integration  of 
the  Hebrews,  but  their  place  was  taken  by  a  more  formid- 
able enemy,  with  some  capacity  for  organization  and 
superior  military  genius.  Under  their  weight  and  impact 
Israel  was  being  gradually  pulverized.  The  Philistines 
had,  however,  not  seriously  disturbed  the  external  form  of 
any  of  the  new  settlements,  since  their  occupation  so  far 
was  mainly  military.  Such  Hebrew  communities,  where- 
ever  they  were  maintained,  were  essentially  unimpaired, 
even  in  those  outlying  districts  where  tribal  solidarity 
and  national  spirit  were  in  abeyance.  The  unit  of  cor- 
porate existence,  the  family  or  clan,  still  remained  intact, 
and  the  carefully  preserved  genealogies  combined  with 
pride  of  race  to  keep  alive  the  sense  of  kinship  with  a 
great  and  worthy  whole,  so  that,  when  the  times  became 
ripe  for  the  reknitting  of  the  ancient  bonds,  Israel  could 
once  more  claim  its  own. 

§  201.  The  two  hundred  years  which  elapsed  between 
the  Exodus  and  the  monarchy  of  David  witnessed  great 
changes,  not  only  in  Palestine,  but  throughout  Syria  also. 
The  whole  territory  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  border 
of  Egypt  was  being  taken  up  anew  by  migrations  of 
peoples  of  Semitic  stock.  Whether  the  Aramaeans  had 
made  any  actual  settlements  to  the  Avest  of  the  Euphrates 
before  the  Hettite  occupation,  is  doubtful.  The  Biblical 
accounts  make  no  mention  of  them,  but  place  them  all  in 
the  region  of  the  "Rivers."  The  Egyptian  and  (more 

1  Note,  e.g.,  the  Asiuaroth  of  1  Sam.  xxxi.  10. 


244  ARAMAEANS   AND   HETTITES   IX   SYRIA          BOOK  V 

accurate)  Babylonian  monuments  are  equally  silent.  There 
is  a  common  impression  that  Damascus,  at  least,  was 
Aramaean  from  the  earliest  times,1  but  it  is  difficult  to 
learn  upon  what  this  supposition  is  based.  More  probably 
it,  as  well  as  much  of  the  territory  to  the  north  and 
northwest,  were  originally  peopled  by  Amorites ;  indeed, 
it  is  plausible  that  its  (the  Babylonian  and  Assyrian) 
ideogram  means  "the  Amorite  city,"  as  being  the  chief 
seat  of  that  people.  The  Egyptian  testimony  to  the 
occupation  of  the  country  north  of  Lebanon  by  the  same 
race  has  been  (§  132)  already  referred  to.  The  absence 
of  mention  of  the  Hettites,  except  as  represented  by  the 
geographical  name,  in  the  Assyrian  records,  from  Tig- 
lathpileser  I  onwards,  can  only  be  explained  on  the  theory 
that  the  Aramaeans,  having  crossed  the  River,  had  suc- 
ceeded in  expelling  and  absorbing  the  remnants  of  that 
once  powerful  race ;  and  we  cannot  believe  that,  after  the 
time  of  the  monarchy  in  Israel,  any  organized  body  of  them 
was  to  be  found  in  this  territory,  now  wholly  Semitic  or 
Semitized.2  The  continuance,  for  example,  of  the  Het- 
tite  rule  in  Hamath,  after  the  establishment  of  Aramaean 
kingdoms  in  Zobah  and  Damascus,  would  have  been 
simply  impossible.  The  Hettites  were  confined  to  the 
country  nearest  Cappadocia,  about  Carchemish,  on  the 
slopes  of  Mount  Amanus,  and  north  and  northwestward 
in  Cilicia.  The  allusions  to  them  in  the  time  of  David 
and  even  later,  not  referring  to  individuals,  must  be 
taken  in  the  same  vague,  traditional,  geographical  sense 
as  that  which  was  perpetuated  by  the  Assyrians  when 
they  called  the  whole  of  Syria  "  the  land  of  the  Hettites  " 
(cf.  §  226). 

§  202.  With  this  exception,  then,  Syria  was  wholly 
Aramaic  in  the  eleventh  and  tenth  centuries,  and  thus  the 
greater  part  of  the  old  caravan  routes  was  in  the  hands  of 
Aramasans.  To  them  the  famous  cities  lying  on  the  route 
certainly  owed  their  main  growth.  These  were  (after 

1  Meyer,  GA.  §  176,  n.  2  See  Note  5  in  the  Appendix. 


CH.  II,  §  203     ARAMAEAN   CITIES   AND    KINGDOMS  245 

Carchemish),  Aleppo  (Assyr.  Halmari),  Harnath  (Assyr. 
Amdtu),  and  Damascus.  Each  of  them  was  the  centre  of 
an  independent  government  of  variable  extent,  Aleppo 
being  the  most  isolated.  Hamath  in  the  middle  of  the 
ninth  century  was  a  kingdom  of  importance,  controlling 
the  upper  part  of  the  Orontes  Valley  and  extending  to  the 
Mediterranean.  It  was  also,  more  than  a  century  earlier, 
a  state  of  some  consequence  (2  Sam.  viii.  9  ft'.).  It  is  the 
classical  Epiphania  (modern  Hamdii),  and  was  the  point 
where  the  caravan  route  from  the  northeast  entered  the 
Orontes  Valley.  This  natural  passage  would  seem  to 
furnish  the  true  explanation  of  the  phrase  "the  entrance 
to  Hamath,"  which  was  the  popular  designation  of  the 
vaguely  conceived  northern  boundary  of  Canaan,  stretch- 
ing out  between  the  Lebanons  to  the  central  emporium. 
Further  south,  along  the  Orontes  basin,  extended  the  king- 
dom of  Zobah  (!"DliJ,  Assyr.  Subif).  It  was  also  important 
in  the  history  of  the  undivided  Israelitish  monarchy,  but 
declined  soon  after,  though  the  city  which  gave  it  the 
name  survived  at  least  three  centuries  longer.  It  lay, 
probably,  near  the  modern  Horns  and  not  far  north  of  the 
Hettite  stronghold,  Kadesh,  over  which,  of  course,  the 
kingdom  of  Zobah  bore  sway.  The  most  important  of  all 
was  Damascus,  whether  as  a  city  or  a  kingdom.  The 
zenith  of  its  power  was  reached  in  the  ninth  century,  when 
its  territory  extended  far  down  into  the  Hauran.  In  the 
time  of  David,  as  we  shall  see  presently,  it  was  merely  a 
more  powerful  kind  of  rival  of  several  other  small  princi- 
palities. Its  history  is  of  the  highest  interest  and  impor- 
tance. It  was  the  greatest  city  or  state  ever  erected  by  the 
Aramaeans,  and  its  relations  with  Assyria,  still  more  than 
with  Israel,  show  that  this  race  of  traders  could  develop 
not  only  military  genius  of  a  high  order,  but  also  patri- 
otism and  courage  worthy  of  any  country  or  of  any  age 
(see  §  235  ff.). 

§  203.    With  the  death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  the  strug- 
gling monarchy  in  Israel  seemed  doomed  forever.      The 


246  DAVID'S   SOLE   EEIGN  BOOK  V 

Philistines  settled  themselves  at  once  in  the  plain  of 
Jezreel,  as  a  separating  force  in  the  heart  of  Palestine. 
That  their  triumph  was  not  a  permanent  one  was  due,  in 
the  first  instance,  to  the  courage  and  devotion  of  Saul's 
general,  Abner,  who  gathered  the  scattered  remains  of  the 
army  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  proclaimed  as  king  Ishbosheth 
(that  is,  Ish-Baal),  a  surviving  son  of  Saul.  He  suc- 
ceeded in  asserting  his  dominion  over  Gilead  and  the 
country  west  of  Jordan,  from  Jezreel  to  Benjamin.  David's 
claim  was  acknowledged  by  Judah  alone.  His  general, 
Joab,  to  whom  he  owed  the  chief  part  of  his  subsequent 
military  success,  cultivated  strife  with  the  legitimist  party 
assiduously  and  with  growing  advantage,  until  Abner 
deserted  the  waning  fortunes  of  Ishbosheth  and  sought  to 
transfer  his  allegiance  to  David,  for  the  avowed  reason  that 
the  latter  alone  would  be  able  to  deliver  Israel  from  the 
Philistines.  But  he  was  treacherously  slain  by  Joab,  and 
his  hereditary  chief  was  also  assassinated.  The  whole  king- 
dom then  fell  to  David,  with  the  formal  and  voluntary 
acknowledgment  of  his  sovereignty  by  the  elders  of  all 
the  tribes. 

§  204.  David  was  still  a  young  man  when  he  came  to 
the  throne  of  the  united  kingdom.  His  first  two  achieve- 
ments were  of  lasting  moment.  The  Philistines  were 
finally  overcome  so  decisively  that  the}*  were  relegated  to 
their  proper  home  on  the  coastland,  where  they  remained 
for  many  centuries  without  permanent  increase  of  territory, 
though  by  no  means  an  unimportant  factor  in  the  later 
politics  of  Palestine.  Of  scarcely  less  importance  for  the 
future  was  the  capture  of  Mount  Zion  from  the  remnant 
of  the  Amorite  tribe  of  Jebusites,  and  its  fortification  and 
upbuilding  as  the  capital  of  the  nation.  In  no  action  of 
the  life  of  David  is  his  political  and  military  genius  better 
illustrated.  The  wavering  tribe  of  Benjamin,  which  had 
just  been  deprived  of  headship  in  Israel,  was  conciliated 
and  inseparably  unified  with  the  ascendant  tribe  of  Judah, 
on  whose  borders  Jerusalem  lay.  Its  commanding  position 


CH.  II,  §  204        DAVID'S   MILITARY   SUCCESSES  247 

marked  it  out  as  a  place  for  the  tribes  to  go  up,  where  the 
sanctuary,  with  the  ark  now  finally  at  rest,  invited  them 
to  worship.  Its  natural  strength  made  it  virtually  impreg- 
nable, at  least  to  any  Palestinian  or  Syrian  foe,  and,  in 
fact,  the  strongest  fortress  in  all  Western  Asia.  These 
auspicious  movements  \vere  the  beginning  of  a  series  of 
successes  which  made  David  the  most  powerful  ruler  west 
of  the  Euphrates,  and  the  foremost  man  of  his  age.  Not 
only  Palestine  and  the  principalities  east  and  south, 
including  Moab  (which  had  absorbed  the  tribe  of  Reuben), 
Ammon,  Edom,  and  Amalek,  but  Syria  also,  as  far  as 
Hamath,  were  either  subdued  or  else  propitiated  his  favour 
with  costly  gifts.  The  Amalekites,  as  it  would  seem,  were 
finally  obliterated.  Edom  was  put  under  Israelitish  admin- 
istration. The  war  with  the  Ammonites  was  the  longest 
and  most  severe,  next  to  that  with  the  Philistines.  It  was 
ended  towards  the  middle  of  David's  entire  reign  of  about 
forty  years.  The  subjection  of  this  ancient  enemy,  which 
was  of  such  importance  for  the  eastern  portion  of  the 
kingdom,  was  delayed  by  the  intervention,  in  Ammon's 
behalf,  of  Syrian  tribes  from  the  north,  who  saw  it  to  be 
necessary  to  accept  the  inducements  of  Ammon  to  make 
head  against  one  who  threatened  to  absorb  Syria  as  well  as 
Palestine.  The  most  powerful  of  these  Aramaean  king- 
doms was  at  that  time  Zobah,  whose  king,  Hadadezer,  led 
the  auxiliaries  drawn  from  Rehob,  Tob,  and  Maacha  — 
petty  principalities  not  far  from  Damascus,  whose  site  is 
not  definitely  ascertained  —  as  well  as  from  his  own 
immediate  subjects.  His  complete  defeat  at  the  hands  of 
Joab  surprised  him  into  the  conviction  that  he  must  sum- 
mon all  possible  allies  to  his  side,  if  the  Aramaean  com- 
munities throughout  Syria  were  themselves  not  to  be  put 
under  the  Hebrew  yoke.  Accordingly,  he  secured  the 
help  of  his  kindred  to  the  east  of  the  River,  and  confronted 
Israel  with  a  great  army.  David  now  took  the  field  in 
person,  with  a  levy  of  all  his  fighting  men.  The  first 
great  trial  of  strength  between  Israel  and  Aram  was 


248  ORGANIZATION  OF  THE   KINGDOM  BOOK  V 

decided  in  favour  of  the  former,  and  then,  after  the  defeat 
of  troops  from  Damascus,  who  were  sent  too  late  and 
perhaps  reluctantly  to  the  assistance  of  Hadadezer,  the 
whole  of  Syria,  as  far  as  the  Euphrates,  submitted  to 
David.  This  included  the  king  of  Hamath,  who  had  been 
at  war  with  Hadadezer,  and  now  sent  gifts,  with  his 
homage,  to  the  victorious  head  of  Israel.  The  capture  of 
the  strong  city  of  Rabbath-Ammon,  in  the  next  year 
(c.  980  B.C.),  put  an  end  to  the  outside  wars  of  David. 
The  possessions  thus  secured,  including  the  tributary 
districts,  were  indeed  large,  — too  large  to  be  permanently 
retained  by  David's  successors,  — and  formed  forever  after 
the  ideal  extent  of  the  realm  of  Israel.1 

§  205.  David  had  now  leisure  to  attend  to  the  organi- 
zation of  his  dominions.  He  had  already  strengthened 
and  beautified  the  city  which  he  had  made  his  capital 
instead  of  Hebron.  There  he  had  established  a  bureau  of 
administration  with  the  regular  officials  of  a  government 
conducted  on  the  scale  of  the  great  contemporary  mon- 
archies, including  a  secretary  of  state  and  a  court  annalist, 
to  whose  functions  we  owe  it  that  from  this  time  forward 
we  are  instructed  fairly  well  as  to  the  affairs  of  Israel. 
The  foundation  of  a  standing  army  was  laid  by  the  selec- 
tion of  a  valiant  body-guard,  composed  largely  of  Philis- 
tian  mercenaries.  He  now  proposed  to  have  all  the 
inhabitants  of  his  dominions  enumerated,  mainly,  no 
doubt,  for  the  purpose  of  a  direct  taxation,  a  movement 
which  was  condemned  and  punished  by  Jehovah,  as  indi- 
cating the  desire  to  accumulate  wealth  at  the  expense  of 
the  people,  and  to  promote  the  centralizing  principle  which 
was  so  characteristic  of  the  despots  of  the  ancient  East 
(§  52).  Such  an  impost  would  probably  have  been  resented 

1  The  kingdom  proper,  according  to  the  census,  extended  on  the  west 
as  far  north  as  Kadesh  on  the  Orontes  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  6 ;  see  Note  5  in 
Appendix).  On  the  east,  Dan  (Laish)  was  the  limit  northward,  since 
the  Arameean  tribes  were  merely  made  tributary,  and  not  annexed  to 
Israel. 


CH.  II,  §  206     DOMESTIC   BROILS   AND  REBELLION  249 

by  the  people,  who  had  not  yet  fully  renounced  the  loose 
relations  of  tribal  or  family  autonomy,  and  whose  cen- 
trifugal tendency  was  being  encouraged  by  miserable  dis- 
tractions in  the  latter  portion  of  David's  reign.  These  dis- 
turbances were  wholly  domestic  and  internal  in  their  origin, 
and  sprang  from  the  inner  circle  of  David's  own  family, 
being  due  to  sentimental  and  moral  weakness,  which 
he  shared  with  many  Oriental  monarchs.  Ending,  as  they 
did,  in  fratricidal  revenge,  and  in  the  rebellion,  almost 
parricidal,  of  his  handsome  and  voluptuous  son  Absalom, 
they  were  not  only  grievous  beyond  expression  to  David, 
but  had  almost  resulted  in  the  rending  asunder  of  the 
nation  on  the  old  deepest  lines  of  cleavage.  The  rebellion 
was  subdued,  but  not  before  a  sanguinary  battle  had  been 
fought,  in  which  Absalom  was  slain.  In  the  intrigues  and 
the  struggle,  old  jealousies  and  hatreds  were  revived,  an- 
other briefer  uprising  evoked,  and  a  renewed  sentiment  of 
bitterness  excited,  which  prepared  the  way  for  the  schism 
which  was  before  long  to  take  place.  Such,  however,  had 
been  the  political  sagacity  and  insight  displayed  by  David 
in  the  early  upbuilding  of  the  nation,  and  so  great  was 
the  influence  of  David's  chosen  counsellors,  that  even  after 
the  king  had  become  decrepit  and  passive  the  newly  forged 
bond  of  union  held  firmly  together;  and  when  his  death- 
hour  came  (c.  960  B.C.),  although  there  was  a  dispute  as 
to  the  succession,  which  was  not  settled  without  cruel 
bloodshed,  involving  the  death  of  the  rival  claimant 
Adonijah,  and  of  Joab  his  champion,  the  people  soon 
cordially  submitted  to  the  yoke  of  the  new  king  Solomon. 
§  200.  The  significance  of  the  reign  of  Solomon  con- 
sisted mainly  in  his  zealous  cultivation  of  the  arts  of 
peace.  David's  subjugation  and  chastisement  of  the  sur- 
rounding1 tribes  had  been  so  thorough  and  drastic  that  no 

O  C3 

very  serious  outside  complications  were  to  be  feared,  and 
Solomon  was  free  to  execute  his  magnificent  architectural 
plans  and  other  projects  for  the  beautifying  and  strengthen- 
ing of  Jerusalem  and  the  kingdom.  Of  special  value  to 


250  SOLOMON'S   WORK   AND   PLANS  BOOK  V 

him  were  the  friendly  relations  between  Phoenicia  and 
Israel,  continued  from  the  time  of  David.  The  Israelites 
had  had  but  little  scope  for  the  development  of  artistic 
skill  in  any  direction,  and  possessed  but  little  aesthetic 
taste.  For  the  erection  of  the  great  buildings  which 
Solomon  undertook,  architects  and  master-builders  were 
furnished  by  Hirom  of  Tyre.  Of  these  edifices,  the  Temple 
on  the  Moriah  peak  of  Zion  was  the  greatest  work,  though 
not  the  most  costly  or  extensive.  As  the  choice  of  Jeru- 
salem to  be  the  national  fortress  and  capital  was  the  most 
important  act  of  David,  so  the  erection  of  the  national 
sanctuary  on  its  most  conspicuous  hill  (projected  also  by 
David)  was  the  most  important  in  the  life  of  Solomon, 
and,  indeed,  of  untold  significance  for  all  coming  ages. 
Solomon's  architectural  activity  was  not  limited  by  the 
building  of  the  sacred  edifice,  and  for  means  to  cany  out 
his  vast  designs  of  improvement  generally  it  was  necessary 
to  make  heavy  demands  upon  the  people.  Moreover,  as 
the  administration  of  the  kingdom  became  more  complex, 
as  wealth  and  luxury  increased,  especially  in  the  capital, 
the  king's  household  became  vastly  enlarged,  and  contri- 
butions had  to  be  made  for  its  maintenance  from  the  whole 
country.  These  needs  involved  a  new  division  and  organi- 
zation of  the  whole  kingdom  for  the  purpose  of  collecting 
taxes  and  other  imposts.  Accordingly,  twelve  districts 
(excluding  Judah)  were  mapped  out,  each  with  its  own 
officer.  This  administrative  division  interfered  to  some 
extent  with  the  autonomy  of  the  family  as  a  governmental 
unit,  and  still  more  with  the  old  tribal  principle,  so  that, 
as  the  simple  conditions  of  social  and  national  life  were 
gradually  broken  up,  the  nation,  or,  rather,  the  monarchy, 
became  of  more  and  more  importance.  And  yet  a  true  and 
lasting  unification  was  never  reached.  The  influences 
that  seemed  and  were  partly  intended  to  secure  this  end 
resulted  finally  in  its  nullification.  The  country,  indeed, 
prospered  beyond  precedent.  Through  the  help  of  the 
Tyrians,  Israel  maintained  for  a  time  something  of  a 


CH.  II,  §  207         PROSPERITY    AND    DISCONTENT  251 

foreign  commerce  by  the  Red  Sea ;  and  an  overland  trade 
with  Egypt,  on  the  one  hand,  and  with  the  kings  of  Syria 
and  the  Hettites  of  Cilicia  and  Cappadocia,  on  the  other, 
was  briskly  and  profitably  carried  on.  In  this  traffic 
Israel  acted  not  merely  as  an  intermediary,  but  also  as  a 
self-interested  principal.  These  and  kindred  enterprises 
tended  greatly  to  national  aggrandizement.  But  the  canker 
of  idolatry,  the  practice  of  which  was  encouraged  in  Solo- 
mon by  his  numerous  heathen  wives,  combined  with  grow- 
ing moral  weakness,  paralyzed  his  force  as  a  theocratic 
king,  and  undermined  his  authority.  Then  came  popular 
discontent  with  the  new  autocratic  administration  and  its 
intolerable  burdens;  and  when,  towards  the  close  of  Solo- 
mon's life,  a  former  officer  of  his,  an  Ephraimite  named 
Jeroboam,  began  to  foment  a  revolt,  he  was  sure  of  a  large 
following  outside  of  the  favoured  tribe  of  Judah.  The 
projected  insurrection  was  not  carried  out,  and  Jeroboam 
fled  to  Egypt  to  avoid  arrest  and  execution;  but  it  was 
now  only  a  question  when  Solomon's  death  should  take 
place  and  then  would  come  the  impending  outbreak. 

§  207.  Solomon,  indeed,  had  not  been  neglectful  of 
means  for  strengthening  his  dynasty  and  maintaining  the 
integrity  of  the  nation.  His  chief  motive  in  making  his 
numerous  matrimonial  alliances  with  foreign  kingly  powers 
was,  no  doubt,  the  consolidation  of  his  kingdom  and  its 
protection  against  more  remote  invaders.  The  most  impor- 
tant of  these  contracts  was  that  made  witli  Pasebchann  II 
of  Egypt,  the  last  king  of  the  Twenty-first  Dynasty,  whose 
daughter  Solomon  received  in  marriiige.  It  is  further 

o 

significant  of  a  desire  to  make  the  territories  of  the  two 
nations  conterminous,  that  the  Egyptian  king  captured 
the  frontier  city  of  Gaza  and  bestowed  it  upon  the  Israel- 
itish  monarch  as  the  dowry  of  his  daughter.  But  this 
compact  was  fruitless  of  permanent  results.  Egypt  was 
itself  in  a  very  unstable  condition.  The  successors  of 
Ramses  III,  of  the  Twentieth  Dynasty  (1 180-1 0">0),  nine 
in  number,  all  of  them  bearing  the  same  name,  had  become 


252  EGYPT   AND   THE    SCHISM   IX   ISRAEL  BOOK  V 

mere  tools  in  the  hands  of  the  great  priestly  guild  of 
Thebes,  and  their  reign  is  marked  both  by  domestic 
weakness  and  by  official  corruption.  The  next  dynasty, 
the  Twenty-first  (1050-945),  was  not  only  controlled  by 
priests,  but  actually  consisted  throughout  of  high-priests 
of  Amon  at  Thebes.  Under  them  the  state  kept  steadily 
growing  internally  weaker,  and  though  the  last  of  the 
kings  just  named  was  able  to  preserve  the  boundaries  of 
the  kingdom,  he  was  deposed  by  the  leader  of  the  Libyan 
mercenaries,  who  for  about  a  century  had  been  gradually 
getting  control  of  the  country  which  they  had  been  hired 
to  protect.  The  usurper,  known  to  us  by  the  name  of 
Shishak,  adopted  a  policy  hostile  to  Solomon,  and  so  gave 
encouragement  and  protection  to  fugitives  from  Israel  and 
its  subject  states,  the  most  noted  of  Avhom  was  Jeroboam. 

§  208.  When  Solomon,  shorn  of  his  moral  glory  and 
crippled  in  his  outward  dignity,  was  removed  by  death 
(c.  925  B.C.),  and  his  son  Rehoboam  was  formally  acknowl- 
edged by  his  own  tribe  and  the  border-land  of  Benjamin, 
the  northern  people  gathered  themselves  in  Shechem,  the 
central  city  of  traditional  sanctity,  and  demanded  a  relaxa- 
tion of  their  burdens  as  a  condition  of  their  allegiance. 
This  being  refused  by  Rehoboam,  who  had  come  to  receive 
their  homage,  the}*  raised  the  standard  of  revolt  under  the 
lead  of  Jeroboam,  whom  they  formally  chose  as  their  king. 
To  him  flocked  all  Israel  north  of  Benjamin.  Henceforth, 
for  two  hundred  years,  we  have  a  divided  Israel,  and  now, 
instead  of  the  kingdom  of  such  fair  promise,  which,  if  it 
had  not  been  for  the  infidelity  and  immorality  of  its 
founders,  might  have  extended  itself  so  as  to  become  an 
empire  superior  to  Egypt  and  fit  to  cope  with  Assyria,  we 
see  two  broken  fragments  of  a  state,  often  at  war  with  one 
another,  and  each  of  them  sure  to  become  an  easy  prey  to 
the  Eastern  conquerors,  when  their  victorious  career  should 
bring  them  to  the  West-land. 

§  209.  The  ideal  Israel  was  further  marred  by  two 
significant  movements  which  had  begun  in  the  days  of 


CH.  II,  §  209  LOSS  OF   SUBJECT   STATES  253 

Solomon.  Edom,  which  had  been  invested  and  garrisoned 
by  David,  revolted  under  the  leadership  of  Hadad,  a  native 
Edomite,  who  had  sought  refuge  at  the  court  of  the 
Pharaoh  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  of  his  country,  and 
had  returned  after  the  death  of  David.  The  trade  by  the 
Red  Sea,  and  its  port  of  Ezion-geber,  was  under  the  control 
of  the  Edomites,  and  this  revolt  was  serious  enough  to  put 
a  stop  to  the  traffic  which  was  only  carried  on  for  the 
Hebrews  by  Phoenician  sailors.  The  other  movement  was 
much  more  serious.  It  was  the  development  of  the  city 
and  territory  of  Damascus,  which,  before  a  century  had 
passed,  became  more  powerful  than  either  section  of  the 
Israelitish  kingdom.  In  Solomon's  time  its  growth  was 
specially  promoted  by  Rezon,  a  fugitive  from  Zobah,  who, 
after  the  conquest  of  that  country  by  David,  led  a  detach- 
ment of  his  fellow-countrymen  to  Damascus,  where  he 
raised  himself  to  supreme  power,  and  succeeded  in  throw- 
ing off  the  yoke  of  Israel.  Moab  and  Ammon  also 
asserted  their  independence,  apparently  just  after  the 
Hebrew  schism. 


CHAPTER   III 

DIVIDED    ISRAEL    AND    ITS    NEIGHBOURS 

§  210.  THE  first  impulse  of  Rehoboam  was  to  put  down 
the  revolt  by  force,  but  better  counsels  prevailed,  leading 
him  to  see  that  it  was  more  than  a  mere  insurrection.  It 
was,  in  fact,  a  spontaneous  movement  on  the  part  of  the 
main  body  of  the  Israelites  to  secure  a  more  equitable 
administration,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  rebuke  the  arro- 
gance of  Judah.  The  schism  left  the  southern  section  a 
mere  remnant.  Yet  it  had  still  many  elements  of  strength 
and  stability,  especially  the  possession  of  the  temple  and 
the  palace,  whose  splendour  and  prestige  the  northern 
kingdom  never  succeeded  in  rivalling;  also,  a  purer 
worship  and  a  feeling  of  loyalty  among  the  people  of  the 
well-compacted  territory,  which  secured  a  permanence  of 
dynastic  rule  throughout  the  four  trying  centuries  that 
were  to  follow  (§  272  ff.).  Jeroboam  endeavoured  to  offset 
the  attractiveness  of  Jerusalem  and  the  influence  of  its 
temple  by  erecting  shrines  to  other  deities,  as  well  as  to 
Jehovah,  in  his  own  kingdom.  Strong  fortresses,  at 
Shechem  and  at  Penuel,  were  also  erected,  and  trusted 
to  for  the  defence  of  Ephraim  and  Gilead.  Forbearance 
was  only  temporary,  and  hostilities  soon  broke  out  between 
the  sister  kingdoms,  the  details  of  which  haye  not  come  to 
us.  It  would  appear  that  the  Judseans  at  first  had  the 
advantage,  probably  through  the  possession  of  the  body- 
guard of  trained  warriors,  which  had  been  maintained  as 
carefully  by  Solomon  as  by  David.  Penuel,  in  fact,  seems 
to  have  been  fortified  on  account  of  a  forced  retreat  from 

254 


CH.  Ill,  §  211  EGYPTIAN   INVASION  255 

the  country  on  the  west  of  the  Jordan,  defended  by  She- 
chem.  Normally,  however,  Judah  was  bound  to  become 
weaker  than  its  more  populous  and  richer  northern  neigh- 
bour, and  an  unexpected  blow  received  by  Rehoboam  served 
to  precipitate  the  relative  decadence  of  his  kingdom. 
Egypt  had  taken  no  aggressive  part  in  the  affairs  of 
Palestine  or  Syria  for  three  centuries.  But  the  first  king 
of  the  Twenty-second  Dynasty  (945-800),  the  Libyan 
commander  Shishak  (945-924),  already  mentioned  (§  207), 
was  vigorous  enough  to  take  advantage  of  the  civil  strife 
that  reigned  in  Palestine,  and  invaded  Judah  in  the  fifth 
year  of  Rehoboam  (920  B.C.).  He  was  the  same  Pharaoh 
who  had  given  shelter  to  Jeroboam,  but  he  does  not  seem 
to  have  preserved  his  friendly  feelings,  for,  according  to 
his  own  report,  he  captured  and  pillaged  towns  in  the 
northern  as  well  as  in  the  southern  kingdom.  With  many 
lesser  places,  Jerusalem  itself  was  taken  by  the  Egyptians, 
and  a  large  part  of  the  treasure  of  Solomon  was  carried 
away.1  No  permanent  subjection  of  Judah  was  effected  by 
this  invasion,  and  in  the  reign  of  Rehoboam's  successor, 
Abijah  (909-907  B.C.),  the  southern  kingdom  had  so  far 
recovered  as  to  gain  a  victory  over  Jeroboam  in  a  general 
engagement. 

§  211.  The  dynasty  of  Jeroboam  extended  through  the 
brief  reign  of  but  one  successor,  Xadab  (c.  910-909).  The 
usurpations  and  revolutions  that  followed  did  not  change 
the  hostile  attitude  of  the  two  kingdoms,  even  when  the 
Philistines  began  to  renew  their  incursions  into  the 
Ephraimitish  territory.  In  the  course  of  a  campaign 
against  them,  Xadab  was  slain  by  an  officer  from  Issachar 


1  On  the  southern  wall  of  the  court  of  the  great  temple  of  Amen  at 
Karnak,  Shishak  has  a  sculpture  representing  this  campaign.  Among 
the  Io3  places  enumerated,  Brugsch  claims  that  the  name  of  the  old  city 
Megiddo  occurs.  If  this  is  true,  we  must  extend  the  incursion  far  to  the 
north,  and  credit  Shishak  with  the  attempt  to  emulate  the  great  invaders 
of  the  olden  time.  The  list  is  instructive,  as  showing  the  advance  in  the 
development  of  Palestine  since  the  days  of  Thothmes  III  and  Ramses  II. 


256  ARAMAEAN   GAINS;    A  NEW  DYNASTY  BOOK  V 

named  Baasha,  who  usurped  the  throne  (c.  909-886  B.C.). 
The  successes  of  the  new  king  encouraged  him  to  attempt 
to  enter  Jerusalem,  where  Abijah's  son  and  successor,  Asa 
(c.  911-871  B.C.),  was  reigning.  The  latter  took  the 
fateful  step  of  calling  in  Aramaean  aid,  and,  by  so  doing, 
brought  about  a  period  of  complications  and  disasters  to 
Israel  as  a  whole,  and  precursive  of  great  disasters  to 
follow.  Ben-hadad  I,  the  son  of  Tab-Rimmon  of  Damascus, 
readily  listened  to  the  appeal.  In  the  war  that  ensued, 
not  only  was  Jerusalem  relieved  from  its  impending  siege, 
but  much  of  the  territory  on  the  west  of  the  Upper  Jordan 
and  the  Lake  of  Chinnereth  was  wrested  from  Israel  and 
incorporated  into  the  realm  of  Damascus.  Thus  one  of 
David's  subject  states  became,  in  less  than  a  century, 
powerful  enough  to  absorb  one  of  the  fragments  of  his 
already  dismembered  empire.  The  controlling  force  in 
the  West-land  was  now  no  longer  Hebrew  but  Aramrean. 

§  212.  The  condition  of  the  northern  kingdom  may  be 
further  learned  from  the  succession  of  conspiracies,  mur- 
ders, usurpations,  and  proscriptions  that  followed  the  death 
of  Baasha,  himself  an  usurper.  His  dynasty  also  had  but 
two  representatives.  His  son  and  successor,  Elah,  was 
permitted  to  reign  only  a  part  of  two  years,  and  after  his 
dethronement  and  death  total  anarchy  prevailed.  There 
was  need  of  a  strong  hand  and  a  new  re'gime,  if  Israel  was 
to  be  saved  from  utter  destruction.  The  needed  leader 
was  found  in  Omri  (c.  885-874  B.C.),  the  general  of  the 
army,  who  was  the  popular  choice  from  the  time  of  the 
death  of  Elah.  His  accession  and  undisputed  power 
marks  an  epoch  in  the  history  of  divided  Israel.  His 
historical  importance  was  due  partly  to  his  choice  of  a 
suitable  place  for  the  capital.  The  royal  residence  had 
been  fixed  at  Tirzah  towards  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
Jeroboam,  and  there  the  first  four  kings  had  been  buried. 
Omri  chose  a  better  site,  twelve  miles  to  the  west,  upon  a 
commanding  height  that  slopes  on  all  sides  to  a  rich  valley 
surrounded  by  hills  (cf.  Isa.  xxviii.  1),  and  called  it  "  Sama- 


CH.   Ill,  §  213  OMRI   AND    HIS   EPOCH  257 

ria,"  from  the  name  of  the  owner  of  the  plot  of  ground 
where  he  planted  the  citadel.  This  remained  the  capital 
till  the  fall  of  the  monarchy.  A  further  element  that 
helped  to  make  Omri's  reign  a  turning-point  in  the  fort- 
unes of  Israel  was  the  fact  that  both  Judah  and  Ephraim 
now  became  aware  that  this  cruel  fratricidal  war  would 
lead  to  the  destruction  of  both  kingdoms  at  the  hands  of 
the  Aramaeans  of  Damascus,  and  henceforth  an  alliance  of 
either  section  with  the  Syrians  against  the  other  was  the 
exception  and  not  the  rule.  That  the}^  were,  in  reality, 
not  absorbed  in  detail,  was  due  to  the  greater  power  of 
Assyria,  which  was  to  become  the  common  foe  and  destroyer 
of  all  the  Avestern  states.  It  was,  in  truth,  a  heavy  task 
that  was  laid  upon  the  dynasty  of  Omri.  The  kingdom, 
though  still  more  powerful  than  Judah,  was  reduced  to 
the  three  tribes  of  Ephraim,  Manasseh,  and  Issachar,  with 
a  portion  of  Zebulon.  East  of  the  Jordan,  Ramoth  and 
other  cities  in  Gilead  were  soon  also  lost  to  Israel,  and  in 
addition  the  king  of  Damascus  forced  the  concession  of 
trading-privileges  to  his  merchants  in  Samaria  (1  K.  xx. 
34).  Yet  in  other  directions  Omri  succeeded  in  extend- 
ing his  authority.  We  learn  from  the  inscription  of  Mesha 
that  Moab  was  brought  under  tribute  by  him.  At  home 
he  secured  a  settled  government,  and  the  Assyrians,  who 
were  now  carefully  watching  the  affairs  of  Palestine,  testi- 
fied to  the  character  of  his  administration  by  regularly 
designating  his  country  "the  house  (territory)  of  Omri" 
(cf.  §  243). 

§  213.  His  son  Ahab  (c.  874-853),  the  second  ruler  of 
this  third  dynasty,  introduced  a  new  element  of  great 
influence  into  the  life  and  history  of  the  nation.  His 
policy,  which  was  probably  a  continuation  of  that  of  his 
father,  was  chosen  with  a  view  to  strengthening  the 
kingdom  by  a  profitable  foreign  alliance,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  with  the  object  of  bringing  Israel  into  good  relations 
with  its  neighbours  by  conforming  as  much  as  possible  to 
their  religious  usages.  He  took  the  first  step  by  marrying 


258  BAAL   WORSHIP   AXD   THE   PROPHETS         BOOK  V 

the  daughter  of  Ethbaal,  king  of  Tyre,  and  the  second  by 
giving  statutory  authorization  to  the  formal  establishment 
of  the  Phoenician  cult.  This  measure  was  more  revolu- 
tionary than  would  at  first  appear.  There  had  all  along 
been  a  noxious  syncretism  of  the  worship  of  the  old 
Canaanitish  Baal  with  that  of  Jehovah ;  but  that  was  some- 
thing different  from  the  adoption  of  the  special  whole- 
sale abominations  which  were  associated  with  Phoenician 
manners  and  worship.  The  same  deity,  nominally, 
might  be  worshipped  in  different  localities,  while  the 
particular  modes,  rites,  and  concomitant  practices  might 
show  important  variations.  In  Phoenicia,  where  wealth 
and  luxury  had  been  enjoyed  on  a  scale  unknown  to  either 
Israel  or  the  Canaanites  of  the  interior,  there  was  a  refine- 
ment, if  one  may  so  speak,  and  at  the  same  time  a  prodi- 
gality of  vicious  indulgences,  connected  with  the  worship 
of  Baal  and  Astarte,  to  which  Israel  had  hitherto  been  a 
stranger,  and  whose  promotion  under  the  new  auspices  has 
made  the  name  of  Jezebel  a  Biblical  synonym  for  all  that 
is  to  the  last  degree  impure,  cruel,  and  shameless.  As 
far  as  the  effect  of  these  things  upon  the  physical  and 
political  life  of  the  state  was  concerned  there  was  a  vast 
difference  between  the  experience  of  an  enterprising,  ener- 
getic community  like  that  of  the  Phoenician  cities,  with 
their  world-wide  plans  and  interests,  and  that  of  Israel, 
contracted  and  simple  in  its  habits  and  aims.  Injurious 
it  was,  no  doubt,  to  both,  but  to  the  one  it  was  a  surface 
sore  on  the  body  politic,  while  to  the  other  it  was  like  a 
cancer  eating  into  the  vitals,  or  a  head  and  heart  sickness 
resulting  in  total  decay  (Isa.  i.  6).  To  Israel  moral 
deterioration  meant  political  as  well  as  spiritual  death. 
The  weal  of  the  nation  lay  in  fidelity  to  Jehovah  alone, 
and  in  his  pure  worship. 

§  214.  But  the  new  condition  of  things  brought  with 
it  its  own  antidote  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  greatest 
blessing  that  was  vouchsafed  to  the  ancient  world.  I  mean 
the  ministry  of  the  Prophets.  Beginning  with  indignant 


Cn.   Ill,  §  215  THE   SOUTHERN   KINGDOM  259 

protests  against  faithlessness  and  wrong-doing,  uttered  at 
court  or  throughout  the  land,  the  Prophets  of  this  era  (as 
distinguished  from  the  ancient  seers,  who  were  either 
"Judges"  or  political  mentors)  became  distinctively 
preachers  of  righteousness,  and  the  organs  of  a  new, 
clearer,  and  more  practical  revelation  of  God's  will  to 
men.  The  era  of  written  Prophec}r,  and  the  publication 
of  the  stern,  faithful  message  as  a  record  and  testimony  for 
all  the  ages,  had  not  yet  come.  But  from  this  time  for- 
ward the  conditions  of  Prophecy  were  present,  and  the 
essence  of  prophetic  discourse  remained  hereafter  essen- 
tially the  same.  And  it  is  profoundly  significant  that, 
just  when  Israel  was  about  to  break  through  the  narrow 
limits  to  which  it  had  been  confined,  and  venture  all 
untried  upon  the  vast  unknown  field  of  foreign  relations 
and  entanglements,  there  should  appear  these  messengers 
from  Jehovah,  telling  of  the  universal  truths  of  his  moral 
government,  and  of  his  world-wide -(sovereignty  in  the  realm 
of  human  thought  and  action. 

§  215.  Ahab's  foreign  policy  was  forwarded  by  the 
maintaining  of  peaceful  relations  with  the  sister  kingdom 
to  the  south.  There  the  course  of  events  had  been  much 
less  turbulent  and  eventful.  Asa's  reign  (§  211)  was 
further  signalized  by  the  repulse  of  a  marauding  band  of 
Egyptians  and  Cushites  under  Zerah  (Egypt.  Osorkon  I), 
the  second  king  of  the  Twenty-second  Dynasty,  whose 
attempt  to  repeat  the  exploits  of  his  predecessor  in  Pales- 
tine was  apparently  the  last  foreign  enterprise  of  the  failing 
Libyan  regime.  Asa's  son,  Jehoshaphat  (c.  871-847),  who 
came  to  the  throne  in  the  fourth  year  of  Ahab,  profited  by 
the  friendship  now  existing  with  Israel  so  far  that,  as  lie 
apprehended  no  danger  from  the  north,  lie  was  able  to 
bring  Edom  again  under  Judaian  administration.  One 
main  object  of  the  persistent  efforts  to  get  possession  of 
Edom  was  the  possibility  afforded  by  such  control  of 
securing  the  trade  of  the  Red  Sea,  which  had  been  lost  to 
Judah  since  the  days  of  Solomon.  Jehoshaphat 's  enter- 


260  SUCCESS   AND   FAILURE   OF   JUDAH  BOOK  V 

prises  in  this  direction  were,  however,  unsuccessful,  on 
account  of  a  disaster  to  his  fleet  (Sept.  "  vessel "),  which 
his  resources  did  not  allow  him  to  repair.  These  opera- 
tions in  Edom  seem  to  have  been  preceded  by  an  invasion 
of  Moabites  and  Ammonites  in  league  with  Edomites, 
which,  however,  came  to  grief  on  account  of  a  sudden 
quarrel  between  the  last-named  and  their  two  allies.  The 
record  (2  Chr.  xx.)  of  such  an  inroad  is  noteworthy, 
because  Judah  was  but  rarely  attacked  from  the  eastern 
side  (see  Ps.  Ixxxiii.  and  §  278).  Jehoshaphat's  alliance 
with  Ahab  against  Damascus  cost  the  latter  his  life,  in  a 
great  battle  waged  for  the  recovery  of  Ramoth  in  Gilead, 
the  key-fortress  east  of  Jordan,  in  which  the  Israelitish 
armies  were  defeated.  This  event  brings  us  to  the  midst 
of  the  Assyrian  relations  with  Syria  and  the  West-land 
generally,  and  it  will  now  be  possible  to  weave  into  one 
narrative  the  history  of  the  action  and  interaction  of  the 
Eastern  and  Western  powers. 


BOOK   VI 

HEBREWS,   ARAMAEANS,   AND  ASSYRIANS 
CHAPTER   I 

ASSYRIAN   ADVANCE   INTO   THE    WEST-LAND 

§  216.  IN  our  cursory  sketch  of  Assyrian  and  Baby- 
lonian history  (§  168-181)  AVG  had  arrived  at  the  tenth 
century  B.C.,  and  had  observed  that  the  quiescence  and 
decline  of  the  former  monarchy  gave  opportunity  to  the 
Hebrews  and  Aramaeans  to  found  and  develop  their  smaller 
communities  in  Palestine  and  Syria.  We  now  come  to 
the  time  when  interference  with  these  settlements  in  ihe 
West-land  became  the  order  of  the  day  with  the  revived 
Assyrian  monarchy.  From  the  middle  of  the  tenth  century 
15. c.  the  princes  of  Assyria  were  aiming  to  repair  the 
weakness  and  exhaustion  of  the  kingdom.  The  lirst  not- 
able ruler  of  the  new  period,  who  still  belongs  to  the 
original  dynasty  that  established  the  independence  of 
Assyria,  was  Rammaii-nirFui  II  ("  Ramman  is  my  help  "), 
who  is  the  first  king  named  in  the  Eponym  Canon,  of 
which  we  shall  have  to  speak  later,1  and  who  died  890  n.c. 
He  was  the  grandson  of  a  second  Tiglathpileser,  and  the 
son  of  Asshur-dfin  I.  He  kept  up  a  long  war  with  Baby- 
lon, which  was  finally  concluded  with  an  honourable  and 
lasting  peace.  His  successor,  Tuklat-Adar  IT,  freed  from 
entanglements  with  Babylon,  began  to  recover  the  territory 


1  See  Note  0  in  Appendix. 
201 


262  IMPERIAL   ASSYRIAN   POLICY  BOOK  VI 

won  by  Tiglathpileser  I,  and  after  a  victorious  campaign 
among  the  Na'iri  (§  179),  erected  his  own  statue  beside 
that  of  the  great  conqueror,  at  the  source  of  the  Supnat, 
an  upper  tributary  of  the  Tigris.  He  died  in  885,  after  a 
reign  of  five  years,  and  was  succeeded  by  the  famous  Asshur- 
nasir-pal  ("  Asshur  protects  the  son,"  885-860  B.C.). 

§  217.  The  imperial  idea  wrought  in  this  famous  mon- 
arch with  all  its  energizing  inspiration.  His  ambition  to 
subjugate  and  degrade  all  competing  nations,  to  enrich 
Assyria  with  their  spoils,  and  to  triumph  over  them  in 
the  name  of  his  gods,  was  intensified  by  the  thought  of 
the  long  supineness  and  obscurity  of  his  country,  and  its 
gradual  retreat  from  the  frontier  in  the  far  west  and  north 
which  Tiglathpileser  I  had  erected.  His  determination, 
vigour,  and  success  were  so  great  that,  from  this  time  for- 
ward, the  advance  of  the  Ass}Trian  arms  received  no 
serious  check,  till  the  dream  of  conquest  of  the  fierce 
warrior-king  was  fulfilled,  two  hundred  years  later.  The 
policy  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Tigris  at  this  period  is 
deserving  of  special  attention,  in  view  of  the  disclosures 
of  the  succeeding  history,  —  all  the  more  so  because  it  is  a 
matter  of  inference  and  not  of  extant  documentary  state- 
ment. The  Assyrian  annals  do  not  record  the  motives  of 
the  great  military  enterprises  of  the  kings;  they  are 
restricted  to  a  bare  recital  of  facts  (cf.  §  12).  From  a 
perusal  of  them  one  might  readily  assume  that  the  main 
objects  of  the  innumerable  expeditions  undertaken  east- 
ward, westward,  northward,  and  southward  were  the 
accumulation  of  wealth  from  the  plunder  of  the  conquered 
tribes  and  nations,  and  the  holding  of  them  in  perpetual 
vassalage  with  the  like  purpose  in  view.  These  objects, 
in  relation  to  the  imperial  policy  as  a  whole,  may  be  fairly 
called  secondary  and  incidental.  The  traditional  policy 
of  Assyria,  as  asserted  by  Asshurnasirpal,  may  be  sum- 
marized thus.  On  the  south  the  great  aim  was  to  keep 
Babylon  at  least  in  check,  and  at  all  hazards  to  prevent 
its  encroaching  upon  the  Assyrian  borders.  On  $he  east, 


Cn.  I,  §  218   PLANS  OF  CONQUEST  AND  CONTROL       263 

the  tribes  which  from  time  immemorial  had  invaded  and 
colonized  Babylonia  were  to  be  rendered  powerless,  either 
as  allies  and  recruits  of  the  latter,  or  as  direct  antagonists. 
In  the  northeast  and  north  the  energetic  and  prosperous 
tribes  to  the  south  of  and  between  Lakes  Urmia  and  Van 
were  to  be  divided  and  spoiled,  so  that  no  consolidation 
with  the  Armenian  population  to  the  further  north  should 
be  effected.  Hence  the  Kurds,  whose  territory  stretched 
from  the  head-waters  of  the  Tigris  eastward  to  near  the 
upper  course  of  the  greater  Zab,  were  the  object  of  persis- 
tent attack  and  spoliation.  The  other  mountain  tribes,  to 
the  northwest,  were  chiefly  to  be  feared  as  possible  invaders 
of  the  rich  Mesopotamia!!  plains  to  the  south.  Among 
these,  the  inhabitants  of  the  fertile  slopes  of  Mount 
Mas  ins  were  singled  out  as  especially  dangerous  foes,  from 
their  proximity  to  the  great  caravan  station  of  Nisibis. 
The  Moschi  and  Tibareni  (the  Tubed  of  Gen.  x.  2),  further 
to  the  northwest,  whose  threatened  incursions  into  the 
West-land  had  excited  the  active  interference  of  Tiglath- 
pileser  I  (§  179),  were  now  considered  as  of  little  conse- 
quence. It  is  needless  to  say  that  the  whole  Aranuean 
territory  along  the  ancient  routes  of  trade  was  to  be  held 
absolutely  free  from  outside  control  or  intrigue,  and 
secured  as  wholly  Assyrian.  Beyond  this,  to  the  west  of 
the  Euphrates,  and  along  the  coast-land  leading  to  the 
Mediterranean,  Egypt,  and  Western  Arabia,  lay  the  great 
lines  of  march  which  were  to  be  followed  persistently  till 
all  the  peoples  of  the  known  world  should  yield  homage 
and  tribute,  and  all  the  lesser  gods  should  be  dethroned 
before  Asshur  and  Adar  and  Ishtar  of  Nineveh. 

§  218.  Asshuniasirpal  did  much  directly  towards  ful- 
filling these  aims  and  forecasts.  The  first  nine  years  of 
his  reign  were  uninterruptedly  occupied  in  the  work  of 
invasion  and  subjugation.  His  first  aim  was  to  repel  and 
prevent  the  incursions  of  the  marauding  tribes  of  the 
eastern  and  northern  mountains.  The  district  lying  be- 
tween Nineveh  and  the  southern  end  of  Lake  Urmia  was 


204  CONQUESTS   EAST   OF  THE   EUPHRATES        BOOK  VI 

subdued,  ravaged,  and  severely  chastised.  Several  Kur- 
dish tribes  to  the  west  and  northwest  of  Lake  Van  came 
next  under  his  rod  and  yoke.  His  triumphs  over  the 
Kurds  brought  the  people  of  Kommagene  to  offer  homage 
and  tribute.  Further  advances  in  this  direction  were 
prevented  by  an  inopportune  revolt  in  Sum  on  the 
Euphrates, —  one  of  those  Mesopotamia!!  cities  which  the 
Assyrian  rulers  had  held  even  during  the  period  of  deca- 
dence. The  outbreak  here  was  quelled  with  terrible 
severity,  which  had  the  effect  of  securing  the  allegiance  of 
the  rich  principalities  between  the  Balich  and  the  Chaboras. 
A  campaign  on  the  head-waters  of  the  Tigris,  near  the 
scene  of  some  of  Tiglatlipileser's  exploits,  came  next  in 
order.  Here  an  old  Assyrian  colony  on  the  Supnat  River, 
of  the  time  of  Shalmaneser  I  (§  175),  had  rebelled.  It 
was  forced  to  return  to  its  duty,  and  the  surrounding 
country,  with  its  fertile  valleys,  was  organized  into  a  rich 
and  important  Assyrian  province.  All  this  was  accom- 
plished before  the  close  of  his  second  year.  The  two 
following  years  (883-882)  were  occupied  with  the  rectifi- 
cation of  the  eastern  frontier  and  the  subjection  of  the 
lands  on  the  upper  course  of  the  Tornadotos  (Turnaf). 
The  next  five  years  were  devoted  to  the  more  complete 
establishment  of  the  Assyrian  dominion  among  the  Kurdish 
tribes,  the  dwellers  on  Mount  Masius,  and  especially  the 
refractory  or  hitherto  unsubdued  fierce  and  formidable 
population  of  Mesopotamia  proper  along  the  Chaboras, 
and  between  that  stream  and  the  Euphrates.  The  accom- 
plishment of  this  end,  after  a  succession  of  terrible  con- 
flicts, marks  the  close  of  the  first  period  of  his  warlike 
enterprises  (877  B.C.). 

§  219.  What  had  thus  been  secured  —  the  isolation  of 
Babylon,  the  terrorizing  and  spoliation  of  the  northern 
mountain  tribes,  and  the  absolute  control  over  Mesopo- 
tamia * —  was  much  in  itself,  and  indispensable  to  the 

1  Babylonia's  interest  in  these  proceedings  is  attested  by  its  king, 
Nabupaliddin  ("  Xebo  gave  a  son  ")  having  sent  a  large  body  of  Kasshite 


CH.  I,  §  220     ADVANCE   TO   THE   MEDITERRANEAN  265 

permanence  of  Assyrian  dominion;  but  it  was  only  the 
first  great  step  in  the  aggressive  policy  of  the  Assyrian 
princes.  The  Euphrates  was  not  only  to  be  held  and 
fortified  on  both  sides;  it  became  also  the  starting-point  of 
a  new  advance,  the  precursor  of  countless  invasions  of  the 
West-land  and  its  final  incorporation  into  the  empire. 
The  opposition  to  the  renewed  victorious  march  was  not 
nearly  so  serious  or  obstinate  as  that  offered  by  the  peoples 
t  )  the  east  of  the  River.  From  Carchemish,  which  retained 
little  or  nothing  of  the  Ilettites  but  the  traditional  name, 
to  the  slopes  of  Mount  A  man  us,  where  a  Hettite  popula- 
tion may  still  have  lingered  (§  201,  22G),  all  the  tribes  of 
Northern  Syria  submitted  to  him,  the  most  of  them  with- 
out a  conflict.  Thence,  descending  the  western  side  of 
Lebanon,  he  was  entitled  to  perform  the  significant  cere- 
mony of  cleansing  his  weapons  in  the  waters  of  the  Great 
Sea,  which  was  thus  constituted  his  western  boundary. 
The  Phoenician  states,  after  their  custom,  brought  tribute 
and  yielded  homage.  Southern  Syria  and  Israel  remained 
as  yet  undisturbed.  Their  unsettlement  and  involution 
in  the  struggles  and  vicissitudes  of  the  Assyrian  Wai's  were 
to  be  accomplished  by  his  successor. 

§  220.  Most  of  the  rest  of  Asshurnasirpal's  twenty-five 
years  was  devoted  to  the  cultivation  of  the  arts  of  peace. 
\Ve  read  of  only  one  more  warlike  expedition,  which  was 
undertaken  ten  years  later  against  some  stubborn  foes 
among  the  Kurds  and  on  Mount  Masius.  The  toughness 
and  unvielding  spirit  of  these  peoples  show  how  the 
Assyrian  monarchs  had  to  conquer  every  foot  of  the  vast 
territory  which  they  annexed,  and  how  unwillingly  the 
supremacy  of  the  invincible  Asshur  was  conceded.  The 
most  notable  of  the  unwarlike  actions  of  Asshurnasirpal 
were  the  upbuilding  and  beautifying  of  Kalach  (Nimrud), 
in  the  angle  formed  by  the  Upper  Zab  and  the  Tigris.  To 
this  city,  founded  by  the  genius  of  Shalmaneser  I  (§  175), 

auxiliaries  to  the  assistance  of  Stihu  in  the  Euphrates,  in  87',).  These  were 
defeated  with  the  rest  (AN.  111/17  ff.).  For  the  locality,  see  Par.  297  f. 


266  MONUMENTS   OF   A   CONQUEROR  BOOK  VI 


lie  transferred  the  royal  residence  from  Asshur,  adorned  it 
with  temples  and  palaces,  upreared  by  the  labour  of  the 
captives  whom  he  had  deported  hither  from  their  homes  in 
various  portions  of  the  conquered  lands.  Here  the  most 
of  his  monuments  have  been  found,  which  now  decorate  in 
such  profusion  the  halls  of  the  British  Museum.  The 
abundance  of  these  sculptured  remains  seems  to  bring  the 
realm  and  genius  of  Assyria  before  us  in  sudden  and 
complete  revelation;  and  they  find  much  of  the  needed 
commentary  in  the  lengthy  inscriptions  of  the  vainglorious 
ruler  whose  deeds  they  were  designed  to  commemorate, 
and  to  whom  they  have  given  an  immortality  very  different 
from  that  which  he  had  sought  from  his  guardian  deities. 
His  prowess  and  fortune  in  war  are  undeniable,  and  not 
less  so  his  zeal  and  success  as  a  builder  of  cities,  palaces, 
and  temples ;  but  it  is  not  these  things  that  the  student 
of  Assyrian  history  chiefly  associates  with  the  name  of 
Asshurnasirpal.  In  these  achievements  he  had  not  a  few 
rivals  on  the  thrones  of  Nineveh  and  Babylon.  It  was  in 
remorseless  cruelty  and  vindictiveness  that  he  was  without 
an  equal  in  the  recorded  history  of  Western  Asia.  We 
may  make  all  possible  allowances  for  one  whose  conduct  of 
war  was  but  an  inflexible  adherence  to  the  practical  logic 
of  the  terrible  creed  that  the  gods  of  Assyria  claimed  all 
mankind,  either  as  subjects  or  as  victims,  and  demanded 
either  their  homage  or  their  life-blood.  But  in  others  we 
see  some  traces  of  human  feeling,  some  relaxation  of  this 
terrible  code  of  penal  satisfaction.  In  the  annals  of 
Asshurnasirpal  we  look  for  such  things  in  vain.  He 
dedicates  his  longest  inscription l  to  Adar,  "  the  sun-god 
as  devastator  and  clesolator."  And  as  his  god  was,  so  was 
he  himself. 


1  I  R.  17-26  ;  one  of  the  longest  of  the  historical  cuneiform  inscriptions, 
engraved  in  three  columns  on  the  great  pavement  slabs  (now  in  the 
Br.  Museum),  found  at  the  entrance  of  the  temple  of  Adar  in  Nimrud. 
On  the  other  inscriptions  of  this  monarch,  see  Tiele,  BAG.  p.  179  ; 
KB.  I,  p.  52. 


Cn.   I,  §  222  SHALMANESER   II  267 

§  221.  His  son,  Shalmaneser  II,  has  more  direct  inter- 
est for  us,  as  it  was  under  his  reign  that  Israel  first  came 
to  feel  directly  the  shock  of  the  Assyrian  arms.  His  long 
reign  (860-825  B.C.)  was  synchronous  with  Jehoshaphat, 
Joram,  Ahaziah,  and  Joash  of  Judah;  Ahab,  Joram,  and 
Jehu  of  Israel;  Ben-hadad  II  and  Hazael  of  Damascus; 
and  Mesha  of  Moab.  As  a  warrior  and  conqueror  he  was 
a  worthy  successor  of  his  father  on  the  throne  of  Assyria, 
even  bettering  his  achievements,  and  extending  more 
widely  the  bounds  of  the  empire.1  He  was  not  so  boast- 
ful, and  perhaps  not  quite  so  cruel ;  but  he  was  fully  as 
g.»od  a  general,  and  a  better  administrator.  His  father's 
quelling  of  the  border  tribes  to  the  west  and  north  had 
brought  the  warlike  monarchy  to  a  new  stage ;  henceforth 
there  was  little  danger  of  invasion  from  without,  and 
therefore  freer  hand  was  given  for  aggression  outside  the 

o  oo 

accustomed  sphere  of  military  operations.  Nearly  every 
year  of  Shalmaneser's  reign  was  signalized  by  a  campaign 
on  a  large  scale,  and  for  twenty-six  years  the  untiring 
warrior  took  the  command  in  person.  His  marches  are 
easily  followed,  because,  although  marked  by  rapid  move- 
ments and  sudden  changes  of  the  scene  of  action,  they 
were  more  systematically  planned  and  executed  than  any 
yet  undertaken  by  an  Asiatic  ruler.  In  accordance  with 
the  fixed  imperial  policy,  the  West-land  was  made  the 
favourite  region  of  his  military  enterprises,  but  his  achieve- 
ments elsewhere  were  also  important,  as  well  as  brilliant. 
These  must  be  briefly  summarized  before  we  consider  more 
particularly  what  naturally  claims  our  chief  attention. 

§  222.  Intermittent  wars,  stretching  over  twenty-seven 
years,  marked  the  relations  between  Assyria  and  Eastern 
Armenia,  or  Ararat  (Urartu*).  These  were  carried  on  by 
Shalmaneser  against  two  brave  and  patriotic  rulers  of  this 

1  His  chief  inscriptions  are  the  annals  engraved  on  the  famous  black 
obelisk  of  Nimrud  (cf.  §  242)  ;  in  Lay.  87-08  ;  the  so-called  Monolith 
Inscription  found  at  Karkh,  near  Diarbekr,  III  K.  7,  8  ;  and  the  texts 
engraved  on  the  bronze  gates  of  Balawat  (Imgur-Bel),  TSBA.  VII,  83  ff. 


2G8  ARMENIA  AND   BABYLONIA  BOOK  VI 

northern  mountain  land,  with  such  success  that  he  was  not 
only  able  to  erect  a  statue  of  himself  at  the  head-waters  of 
the  Tigris,  as  three  of  his  predecessors  had  done,  but  even 
to  penetrate  to  the  source  of  the  Euphrates  and  there 
perform  the  same  significant  act,  which  symbolized  the 
control  of  the  whole  course  of  these  mighty  streams  and 
the  lands  which  they  watered.  The  total  results  of  the 
numerous  engagements  with  the  stubborn  defenders  of 
Armenian  independence  can,  however,  hardly  have  been 
satisfactory,  and  the  last  campaign  in  Shalmaneser's  time 
(833  u.c.)  seems  to  have  terminated  in  an  indecisive 
engagement. 

§  223.  A  coveted  opportunity  to  secure  influence  in 
Babylon  was  offered  to  Shalmaneser  early  in  his  reign. 
To  understand  the  situation  then,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
give  a  summary  review  of  the  leading  historic  movements 
that  were  now  affecting  Babylonia.  After  the  time  of 
Nebuchadrezzar  I  (see  §  178)  the  power  of  Bab}*lonia 
speedily  declined,  apparently  on  account  of  inner  disin- 
tegration and  the  influx  of  new  elements.  This  declen- 
sion nearly  coincided  in  point  of  time  with  the  condition 
of  Assyria  after  the  death  of  Tiglathpileser  I.  It  would 
seem  that  in  the  brief  dynasties  that  followed  that  of 
Nebuchadrezzar,  it  was  not  always  possible  to  maintain  a 
native  regime,  since  names  of  kings,  partly,  at  least,  Kas- 
shite,  are  found  in  the  meagre  and  imperfect  documents 
relating  to  the  time.  Two  main  movements  contributed 

o 

to  undermine  the  unity  and  impair  the  strength  of  Baby- 
lonia. In  the  northwest,  north,  and  northeast,  roving 
bands  of  Aramreans  had  effected  something  more  than  a 
mere  pastoral  and  commercial  residence.  Though  normally 
opposed  by  the  Assyrians  and  friendly  to  Babylonia,  they 
yet  accepted  no  service  under  the  latter,  and  by  occupying 
the  country  claimed  by  it  south  of  the  old  Assyrian  boun- 
dary, they  came  to  regard  encroachment  on  their  neighbours 
as  a  legitimate  and  matter-of-course  proceeding.  In  the 
south  new  nationalities  were  arising,  which  were  destined 


CH.  I,  §  223  THE   CHALD.EAX   SETTLEMENT  269 

ultimately  to  absorb  the  whole.  This  movement  is  one  of 
the  most  important,  as  it  is  one  of  the  least  understood,  of 
Oriental  history.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  while  the  old 
designations  "  Shumer  and  Akkad "  (§  110)  were  still 
vaguely  employed  together  for  the  most  of  the  country 
from  Sippar  southward,  a  new  appellation  was  growing  up 
for  South  Babylonia,  from  the  beginning  of  the  ninth 
century  B.C.  In  879  we  first  find  the  term  Kaldu  used  for 
that  geographical  division.1  And  it  soon  appears  (from 
the  time  of  Shalmaueser  II  onwards)  that  this  region  had 
come  to  be  divided  up  between  a  number  of  tribes,  appar- 
ently of  pure  Semitic  origin,  all  of  them,  as  well  as  their 
respective  territories,  distinguished  by  the  prefix  Bit 
{i.e.  "house,  family").  Of  these  the  most  important  was 
Bit-Yakin,  of  which  more  will  have  to  be  said  hereafter. 
It  was  the  most  southerly,  lying  close  about  the  mouth 
of  the  Euphrates.  That  the  Chaldees  settled  here  after 
the  ancient  Babylonian  period  may  be  inferred  partly  from 
the  fact  of  their  pure  Semitic  race,  as  distinguished  from 
the  northern  people  with  their  Kasshite  and  other  foreign 
admixture,  and  partly  from  their  evident  retention,  until 
the  period  in  question,  of  a  separate  tribal  organization. 
It  is  impossible  to  think  of  them,  in  a  cultivated  country 
like  Babylonia,  as  having  relapsed  from  a  more  highly 
developed  centralized  form  of  government  into  primitive 
tribalism,  each  under  the  headship  of  its  chief;  and  it 
may.  I  think,  be  taken  for  granted  that  they  owed  their 
origin  to  a  Semitic  immigration.  It  is  natural  to  look  for 
their  homes  in  the  border  of  the  neighbouring  desert, 
whence  perhaps  (§  21  f. )  Babylonia  received  its  original 
population.  Thus  we  may  learn  to  trace  the  continual 
preservation  of  the  fundamental  Semitic  stock  in  the  lower 
region  of  the  Rivers,  to  a  perpetual  influx  of  Aramaeans 
on  the  North  and  of  Arab-like  immigrants  from  the  South. 

1  AN.  Ill,  23  f .  A  suggestion  of  the  same  people  is,  perhaps,  given  in 
"the  dynasty  of  the  Sea-Lancl "  which  followed  that  of  Nebuchadrezzar  I, 
(§  178)  lasting  twenty-one  years. 


270  ASSYRIANS   IN   BABYLONIA  BOOK  VI 

§  224.  The  opportunity  to  interfere  in  Babylonian 
affairs  came  to  Shalmaneser  in  852  B.C.  Nabu-pal-iddin 
("Xebo  has  given  a  son"),  who  had  intrigued  and  sent 
troops  against  Asshurnasirpal  during  his  Mesopotamia!! 
war  (§  218),  kept  on  good  terms  with  his  son,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  forms  of  a  special  treaty.  At  his  death  civil 
war  broke  out,  in  consequence  of  a  rebellion  on  the  part 
of  a  younger  son  against  the  legitimate  heir.  The  former 
was  defeated  and  slain  by  the  forces  of  Shalmaneser,  who 
thereupon  ingratiated  himself  with  the  people  of  Babylon 
by  rich  offerings  in  the  national  temples,  and  also  received 
the  homage  of  the  principalities  on  the  Lower  Euphrates 
(Chaldees),  which  had  revolted  against  Babylon  and  were 
brought  to  terms  by  an  Assyrian  expeditionary  force. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  whole  of  Babylonia 
became  now,  for  a  time,  vassals  of  Assyria.  Shalmaneser 
also  made  a  conquest,  or  effected  at  least  a  temporary 
occupation  of  the  land  of  Parsua,1  which  stretched  east- 
ward from  Lake  Urmia  towards  the  Caspian  Sea,  and  of 
Amadai  (Madai,  Media),  both  of  them  being  regions  new 
to  Assyrian  armies  (836  B.C.). 

§  225.  More  serious,  and  of  greater  permanent  impor- 
tance, were  his  campaigns  in  Western  Mesopotamia  and 
Syria.  Some  conception  of  his  endeavours  to  secure  for 
Assyria  the  whole  region  west  of  the  Euphrates  may  be 
gathered  from  the  fact  that  he  crossed  that  stream  twenty- 
four  times,  and  has  recorded  no  less  than  nineteen  expedi- 
tions to  the  land  of  the  Hettites.  Before  dealing  with 
these  in  any  detail,  it  will  be  well  to  revert  for  a  little  to 
the  condition  of  affairs  in  the  West-land,  and  especially 
to  get  as  clear  a  view  as  possible  of  the  relations  of  Israel 
and  "Syria  "  to  each  other  and  to  the  outside  world. 

§  226.  For  the  time  of  Shalmaneser  and  Ahab  the 
distinction  between  Middle  and  Southern  Syria  may  be 
conveniently  maintained.  Any  clear  separation  between 

1  Not  the  same  as  Persia,  which  was  originally  a  small  district  south  of 
Elam. 


CH.  I,  §  227  DIVISIONS   OF   SYRIA  271 

Middle  and  Northern  Syria  it  is  impossible  to  make,  either 
geographical  or  political;  but  we  may  content  ourselves 
with  one  formed  by  a  line  drawn  from  Arpad,  westward 
to  the  mouth  of  the  Orontes  (cf.  §  125).  The  greater 
portion  of  the  population  of  Middle  Syria  was  thus  grouped 
about  Aleppo  and  Hamath.  Between  these  two  localities 
there  stretched  east  of  the  mountain  ridge  a  thinly 
inhabited,  sandy  plain.  The  towns  on  the  coast,  from 
Arvad  southward  to  Akko,  form,  of  course,  a  division  by 
themselves  as  Phoenician  cities.  In  Middle  and  Southern 
Syria  the  Arainsean  settlers  had  now  concentrated  them- 
selves into  two  powerful  states,  Hamath  and  Damascus, 
the  latter  being  by  far  the  most  important,  a  community, 
indeed,  which  at  the  head  of  a  stable  confederacy  of  all  the 
western  states  might  for  a  time  have  turned  back  the  tide 
of  Assyrian  invasion.  At  the  present  juncture  it  was 
chiefly  occupied  in  trying  to  overcome  and  absorb  its 
neighbours.  The  northern  division  seems  to  have  con- 

o 

tained  a  more  mixed  population,  though  here  also  there  is 
no  doubt  that  the  Semitic  Aramreaii  was  largely  pre- 
ponderant. It  was  certainly  so  in  Carchemish ;  while  in 
the  more  westerly  situated  kingdom  of  JHattin,1  between 
the  Orontes  and  the  Efrin,  some  of  the  names  of  the  cities 
suggest  a  Semitic  origin.  The  most  of  the  geographical 
terms,  however,  applying  to  the  region  northwest  to  Cilicia 
(Hilakku)  and  northward  to  Kommagene,  are  plainly 
non-Semitic,  and  it  is  probable  that  both  here  and  in 
Chattin,  the  Ilettites  were  more  or  less  strongly  repre- 
sented (cf.  §  201). 

§  227.  The  most  formidable  opposition  to  Shalmaneser 
was  offered  by  the  two  Aramamn  states  which  lay  at  the 
extreme  ends  of  Syria,  Beth-Eden  (BJt-Adini)  in  the 
north,  mostly  on  the  east  of  the  Euphrates  (2  K.  xix.  12), 

1  For  this  country,  whose  name  could  also  be  read  Patin,  see  KGF. 
p.  214  ff.  For  the  Hettite  character  of  the  monarchy  may  be  cited  the 
name  of  the  king  subdued  by  Shalmaneser.  Sapalulmi  is,  of  course,  of 
the  same  origin  as  Sapalel  (§  103,  cf.  Note  5  in  Appendix). 


272  SHALMANESER   IN  NORTH   SYRIA  BOOK  VI 


and  Damascus  in  the  south.  The  first-named  kingdom, 
small  in  extent  but  enriched  through  its  fertility,  and  still 
more  by  its  advantageous  position  for  the  overland  trade, 
made  a  prolonged  and  most  heroic  defence  of  its  liberties. 
At  first  its  ruler,  Achuni,  was  enabled  to  avail  himself  of 
the  assistance  of  the  principalities  lying  westward,  as  far 
as  Cilicia,  of  which  the  most  important  were  Carchemish 
and  Chattin.  Two  combinations  thus  formed  were  succes- 
sively broken,  and  in  Shalmaneser's  third  year  the  fortress 
and  capital  of  Achuni  was  taken.  The  intrepid  Achuni 
did  not  yet  yield  to  defeat,  but  betook  himself  to  his 
strongest  remaining  fortress,  on  a  lofty  peak  on  the 
Euphrates  bank,  where,  however,  he  was  next  year  (856 
B.C.)  himself  finally  taken  and  carried  in  triumph  to  the 
city  of  Asshur.1  The  confederate  princes  had  already 
submitted  themselves  the  previous  year,  and  yielded  a 
costly  tribute. 

§  228.  The  annexation  of  Beth-Eden  and  the  subjec- 
tion of  the  allied  states  left  the  way  clear  for  an  advance 
upon  Southern  Syria.  This  was  made  in  854  B.C.,  the 
sixth  year  of  Shalmaneser.  The  account  which  the 
Assyrian  annalist  gives  of  the  expedition  is  extremely 
valuable,  throwing  light  upon  the  reciprocal  relations  of 
Israel  and  Syria,  and,  in  fact,  upon  the  political  condition 
of  Syria  and  Palestine  generally.  It  will  be  well  to  let 
Shalmaneser  tell  the  story  of  the  whole  expedition  in  his 
own  words : 2  — 

"In  the  eponymate  of  Dayan-Asshur  (854  B.C.),  in  the 
month  Ayru  (May)  the  fourteenth  day,  I  set  forth  from 
Nineveh,  crossed  the  River  Tigris,  and  approached  the 
towns  of  Giammu  on  the  River  Balich.  These  were  seized 
with  fear  because  of  the  awe  of  my  majesty  and  the  terror 
of  my  puissant  arms,  and  they  slew  Giammu  their  liege 
lord  with  their  own  weapons.  I  occupied  Kitlala  and 
Til-sa-pal-ahi.  I  installed  my  own  gods  in  his  temples, 
and  in  his  palaces  celebrated  a  sacred  feast.  I  opened  his 

i  Mon.  "29-75  :  Obel.  26-49.  2  Mon>  (III  R.  8),  78  ff. 


CH.  I,  §  228      SYRIA   AND   PALESTINE   AROUSED  273 

storehouse,  beheld  his  treasure,  carried  away  his  goods  and 
chattels  as  spoil,  and  transported  them  to  my  own  city  of 
Asslmr.  From  Kitlala  I  set  forth  and  drew  near  to  Fort 
Shalmaneser.  In  boats  of  sheep-skin  I  crossed  for  the 
second  time  the  River  Euphrates  at  its  flood.  The  tribute 
of  the  kings  on  the  further  side  of  the  Euphrates :  of  Shan- 
gar  of  Carchemish,  of  Kundashpi  of  Kommagene,  of  Araini 
son  of  Gusi,  of  Lalli  of  Milid,  of  Cha}-ani  son  of  Gabari, 
of  Kalparudaof  Chattin,  of  Kalparuda  of  Gamgum:  silver, 
gold,  lead,  copper,  copper  vessels,  I  received  in  Asshur- 
utlr-asbat  on  the  further  side  of  the  Euphrates,  in  the  city 
Shagur,  which  the  people  of  the  Hettite  country  call  Pitru 
(Petlior).  I  set  forth  from  the  River  Euphrates  and  drew 
near  to  Chalman  (Aleppo).  They  feared  to  do  battle  with 
me  and  embraced  my  feet.  I  received  gold  and  silver 
from  them  as  tribute,  and  offered  sacrifice  to  Ramman  of 
Aleppo.  I  set  forth  from  Aleppo  and  drew  on  to  the  cities 
of  Irchulini,  of  the  land  of  Hamath.  I  took  Adinnu, 
Mashga,  and  his  royal  city  Argana.  I  set  forth  from  Argana 
and  arrived  at  Karkar.  Karkar,  his  royal  cit}-,  I  razed  and 
destroyed  and  burned  with  fire.  Twelve  hundred  chariots, 
1200  cavalry,  20,000  soldiers  of  Dadda-idri  (Hadadezer)  of 
the  land  of  Damascus:  700  chariots,  700  cavalry,  10,000 
soldiers  of  Irchulini  of  the  land  of  Hamath ;  2000  chariots, 
10,000  soldiers  of  A-lia-ab-bu  (Ahab)  of  the  land  of  Sir- 
'a-la-ai  (Israel);  50(f  soldiers  of  the  land  of  Kue;  1000 
soldiers  of  the  land  of  Musri;  10  chariots  and  10,000  sol- 
diers of  the  land  of  Irkanati ;  200  soldiers  of  Matinu-ba'al 
of  the  land  of  Arvad ;  200  soldiers  of  the  land  of  Usanat ; 
30  chariots,  10,000  soldiers  of  Adunu-ba'al  of  the  land  of 
Shian;  1000  camels  of  Gindibu'u,1  of  the  land  of  Arabia, 
.  .  .  1000  soldiers  of  Ba'asha  the  son  of  Ruchub,  of  the 
land  of  Ammon  (A-ma-na-ai) —  these  twelve  [eleven] 

1  That  is  modern  Arabic  (iundubu.  gundabit,  and  gindabu,  "a  desert 
locust."  The  name  is  interesting  (1)  as  illustrating  the  animal  totem 
influence  among  the  most  ancient  Arabs  known  to  us,  and  (2)  as  showing 
the  persistency  of  Arabic  sounds  till  the  present  day. 

T 


274  A  COALITION  AND  A   GREAT  BATTLE        BOOK  VI 


kings  he  took  to  himself  as  auxiliaries,  and  they  marched 
against  me  to  fight  me  in  battle.  With  the  magnificent 
troops  which  the  lord  Asshur  gave  me,  and  the  powerful 
weapons  which  Nergal  my  leader  had  granted  to  me,  I 
fought  with  them ;  from  Karkar  to  Gilza  I  accomplished 
their  rout;  14,000  of  their  fighting  men  I  laid  low  with 
my  weapons.  Upon  them  like  Ramman  (the  thunder-god) 
I  poured  down  a  flood;  their  corpses  I  strewed  about,  filled 
the  surface  of  the  plain  with  their  multitudinous  troops ; 
made  their  blood  stream  down  with  my  weapons." 

§  229.  From  the  few  remaining  lines,  which  it  is 
impossible  to  translate  fully  on  account  of  the  obscure 
words  which  they  contain,  we  learn  that  Karkar,  where 
this  noted  battle  was  fought,  lay  close  to  the  river  Orontes. 
The  king  also  states  that  he  captured  the  chariots  and 
horses  of  the  allies  with  their  riders.  Another  briefer 
account1  tells  that  he  slew  20,500  fighting  men.  Still 
another  inscription2  tells  that  the  number  put  hors  du 
combat  was  25,000. 

§  230.  This  campaign,  which  opens  a  new  era  in  the 
history  of  both  East  and  West,  is  worthy  of  more  than  a 
passing  notice.  It  is  first  to  be  observed  that  Shalmaneser, 
by  striking  out  a  new  path  for  himself  and  appearing  in 
Syria  proper,  roused  all  the  Western  communities  to  a 
state  of  apprehension,  and  some  of  them  to  immediate 
action.  He  was  the  first  Assyrian  monarch  who  had 
ventured  within  the  territory  claimed  by  Aramaeans  and 
Hebrews  as  peculiarly  their  own.  His  direct  march 
from  Aleppo  to  Hamath  showed  plainly  his  ultimate 
purpose  of  spoiling  or  subjugating  the  whole  of  the  coast- 
land.  The  constituents  of  the  confederate  forces  are  also 
noteworthy.  They  may  be  divided  into  four  main  sections  : 
the  northern,  western,  central,  and  southern.  From  the 
north  we  find  small  detachments  from  Kue  (Eastern 
Cilicia)  and  Musri  (in  Western  Cappadocia).  These 
principalities,  the  former  of  which,  at  least,  is  mentioned 

1  Obel.  54-66.  -  Lay.  46,  1-9. 


CH.  I,  §  230    ELEMENTS  OF  THE   CONFEDERATION  275 

ill  the  Old  Testament,1  had  apparently  so  far  not  yielded 
themselves  as  Assyrian  vassals,  and  with  the  vain  hope 
that  the  terrible  invader  might  be  crushed  in  his  present 
adventure,  and  that  they  might  thus  be  spared  in  coming 
years,  they  hung  upon  the  rear  of  Shalmaneser  until  the 
allies  concentrated  their  forces  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Karkar.  The  second  section  consisted  of  the  more  northerly 
Phoenician  cities,  whose  inhabitants  could  not  afford  such 
a  heavy  tribute  as  that  paid  by  Tyre  and  Sidon,  and  who 
perhaps  dreaded  lest  their  ports  should  be  occupied  and 
utilized  by  the  Assyrians  for  the  Mediterranean  trade. 
The  central  and  main  sections  were  Hamath,  Damascus, 
and  Israel,  who  together  furnished  much  more  than  half  of 
the  whole  arm}-  of  defence,  and  almost  all  of  the  chariots 
and  horsemen.  The  last  division  comprised  detachments 
of  Ammonites  and  Arabs.  The  territory  of  the  former 
adjoined  that  of  Damascus,  since  the  latter  had  expelled 
Israel  from  its  possessions  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  as  a 
warlike  and  independent  race,  they  were  anxious  to  secure 
themselves  against  future  surprises.  The  "camels"  of 
the  Arabian  Gindibu  were  perhaps  mercenary  troops,  hired 
for  the  sake  of  a  better  commissariat,  since  the  Bedawin, 
even  if  belonging  to  a  half-cultivated  border  region,  would 
not  have  been  likely  of  their  own  motion  to  take  the 
offensive  against  a  power  like  the  Assyrians.  The  im- 
mediate aim  of  this  confederation  was,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, the  relief  of  Hamath,  nor  does  it  appear  that  the 
Assyrian  monarch  had  intended  or  expected  to  deal  seri- 
ously with  the  much  greater  realm  of  Damascus  during 
this  campaign.  How  the  result  of  the  battle  may  have 
affected  his  designs  we  cannot  tell.  His  losses,  which  of 
course  he  does  not  report,  must  have  been  considerable, 
and  Hamath,  at  least,  was  not  actually  taken  till  a 
subsequent  invasion.  He  did  not  return  to  the  West  till 

1  1  K.  x.  28  ;  1  Chr.  x.  Ifi,  where  ."ipfi  should  be  translated  "  from 
Kue."  Cf.  Sept.  and  Vulg.  and  see  Lenormant,  Origin  de  Vhistoire,  vol. 
ii,  Part  2,  p.  6  ;  Tomkins.  in  Pal.  Espl.  Quart.,  April,  1885. 


270  ADJUSTMENT   TO   THE   BIBLICAL   RECORD      BOOK  VI 

five  years  later,  his  attention  being  absorbed  by  the  affairs 
of  the  North  and  East. 

§  231.  What  light  do  these  reports  from  the  inscrip- 
tions shed  upon  the  Bible  story?  How  shall  we  adjust  to 
one  another  the  two  narrations  ?  The  first  difficulty  that 
strikes  one  is  that  the  relations  between  Israel  and  Damas- 
cus were  usually  very  unfriendly,  and  a  close  alliance 
between  them  would  seem  hard  to  account  for.  We  must, 
however,  at  the  outset,  remark  that  the  sacred  writer  does 
not  professedly  give  a  complete  account  of  Ahab's  military 
and  political  career,  but  only  brings  out  those  incidents  in 
his  history  which  were  connected  with  the  fortunes  of  the 
religion  of  Jehovah  and  its  ministers,  the  Prophets.  Still, 
the  Bible  does  give  at  least  a  hint  of  a  conjunction  in  the 
fortunes  of  Ahab  and  Ben-hadad,  which  afforded  the  con- 
ditions of  an  alliance  between  the  two  monarchs  if  both 
parties  should  find  it  expedient  or  urgent.  And  after  the 
series  of  quarrels  and  battles  between  them,  the  great 
advantage  of  such  a  league  was  rendered  suddenly  apparent. 
The  approaching  army  of  the  terrible  Assyrian  created  in 
the  minds  of  the  western  kings  and  chieftains  a  sense  of 
the  need  of  a  confederation,  and  of  burying,  at  least  for  a 
time,  all  sense  of  reciprocal  injury.  So  a  combination  of 
Israel  with  the  other  leading  powers,  Damascus  and 
Hamath,  may  be  explained,  and  Ahab  must  the  more 
readily  have  attached  himself  to  the  league,  since  so  many 
of  the  neighbouring  tribes  swarmed  with  their  contingents 
to  the  defence  of  the  threatened  territory.  Now  there  is 
one  passage  in  the  Scripture  history  of  these  times  which 
indicates  a  period  in  the  reign  of  Ahab  that  may  fit  in 
with  the  narrative  of  the  inscriptions.  This  is  1  K.  xx., 
which  describes  the  unexpected  defeat  of  the  Syrians  by 
the  Israelites  at  Aphek,  with  the  improved  relations  fol- 
lowing it.  Verse  34  informs  us  of  a  solemn  convention 
between  Ahab  and  Ben-hadad,  according  to  which  the 
former  was  entitled  to  hold  a  special  market  in  Damascus, 
besides  securing  the  cities  which  had  been  captured  by  the 


CH.  I,  §  232     ALLIANCE  OF  AHAB  WITH  DAMASCUS  277 

Syrians  from  Omri.  No  other  situation  that  we  know  of 
in  the  affairs  of  Israel  in  the  lifetime  of  Ahab  furnishes 
suitable  conditions.  In  1  K.  xxii.,  we  are  told  that,  after 
a  three  years'  peace,  hostilities  broke  out  afresh  between 
Syria  and  Israel,  provoked  by  Ahab  with  his  ally  Jehosha- 
phat.  The  former  fell  at  Ramoth-gilead,  leaving  the  field 
and  the  disputed  territory  to  his  old  adversary.  Now,  if 
the  above  combination  is  correct,  as  the  battle  of  I>arkar 
is  fixed  by  Shalmaneser  himself  at  854  B.C.,  the  death  of 
Ahab  would  have  to  be  set  between  that  date  and  851, 
three  years  later.  It  should  be  added  that  Israel  is  not 
alluded  to  in  the  account  given  of  the  next  two  expeditions 
of  Shalmaneser  against  the  Syrians,  though  a  further 
league  between  Ben-hadad  and  the  king  of  Hamath  with 
minor  neighbouring  states  is  mentioned,  and  we  may  infer 
that  Israel  did  not  participate  in  the  defence.  In  fact,  we 
know  from  the  Bible  history  (see  2  K.  vi.  8,  24)  that 
Israel,  under  Joram,  was  again  in  its  normal  condition  of 
wai1  with  Damascus,  and  also  engaged  with  its  rebellious 
vassal,  Moab. 

§  232.  No  serious  attempt  has  been  made  to  discredit 
the  Assyrian  report  of  this  campaign  in  its  essential 
features,  though  objections,  based  on  mere  ignorance  and 
a  general  prejudice  against  the  historical  value  of  the 
inscriptions,  have  been  brought  forward  against  taking 
Atialbu  Sir* dial  to  represent  Ahab  of  Israel.  These  have 
been  thoroughly  disposed  of  by  Schrader,1  and  are  not  now 
repeated.  Nor  is  the  essential  accuracy  of  the  Bible 
account  of  Ahab's  military  undertakings  impugned.  The 
only  controversy  of  any  significance  relates  to  the  period 
in  Ahab's  reign  in  which  the  battle  of  Karkar  in  854  H.C. 
ought  to  fall.  The  theory  given  above  is  the  one  usually 
adopted,  but  it  has  some  earnest  opponents.  Chief  among 

1  KGF.  p.  359-304.  I  take  this  opportunity  of  reminding  my  readers 
of  the  eminent  services  rendered  by  Professor  Schrader  to  the  cause  of 
historical  truth  in  this  work,  which  is  principally  devoted  to  refuting  super- 
ficial attacks  ifpon  the  results  of  the  decipherment  of  the  Inscriptions. 


278  HYPOTHESIS  OF   WELLHAUSEN  BOOK  VI 

these  is  Wellhausen,1  who  thinks  that  Syria  must  have  held 
a  sort  of  suzerainty  over  Israel,  since  Israel  was  all  along 
the  feebler  state,  and  subordinate  to  Syria  till  the  troubles 
of  the  latter  with  Assyria  so  weakened  it  that  Israel  was 
enabled  to  contend  with  it  on  equal  terms.  Israel,  there- 
fore, furnished  its  contingent  because  it  was  compelled  to, 
but  the  defeat  of  the  league  gave  it  the  opportunity  it 
coveted  of  asserting  its  independence.  The  subjection  of 
Israel  to  Damascus  would  then  be  coincident  with  the  loss 
of  the  cities  (including  the  adjacent  territory)  in  the  time 
of  Omri,  which  is  alluded  to  in  1  K.  xx.  34.  Wellhausen's 
theory,  accordingly,  is  that  the  events  in  question  must 
be  put  earlier  in  Ahab's  reign,  before  his  recorded  wars 
with  Syria. 

§  233.  The  hypothesis  is  acute  and  plausible.  Of 
decisive  evidence  there  is,  of  course,  none  on  either  side, 
but  the  probabilities  are  against  Wellhausen's  assumption. 
In  the  first  place,  there  is  no  evidence,  direct  or  indirect, 
that  Israel  was,  properly  speaking,  a  vassal  of  Damascus. 
The  latter  was,  no  doubt,  much  the  more  powerful  state 
of  the  two,  especially  before  the  Assyrian  invasions  began 
to  tell,  and  Omri's  loss  of  territory,  along  with  his  con- 
cession of  free  trade  in  Samaria,  implies  either  defeat  in 
war  or  a  voluntary  propitiation  of  a  dangerous  superior. 
But  this  is,  in  either  case,  something  quite  different  from 
the  obligation  to  follow  the  superior  in  his  foreign  wars, 
especially  when  it  is  observed  that  the  contingent  furnished 
by  Ahab  was  about  as  powerful  as  that  provided  by  the 
supposed  liege  Ben-hadad,  and  in  the  most  formidable 
portion  of  the  array  actually  twice  as  strong.  Indeed, 
Ahab,  strengthened  by  the  Phoenician  alliance,  and  main- 
taining as  he  did  the  dominion  acquired  by  his  father  over 
Moab,  was  evidently  an  ambitious  ruler  aspiring  to  a 
position  of  predominance.  Again,  the  assumption  that 

1  Jahrb.  fur  deutsche  Ineologie,  XX,  p.  27;  Art.  "Israel"  in  Encycl. 
Brit.,  §  4  (Skizzen,  etc.  I,  31).  Of.  Stade,  GVI.  528  f.  On  the  other  side, 
see  especially  KGF.  307  ff.  •*• 


CH.  I,  §  234  ITS   IMPROBABILITY  279 

two  powers  which  were  habitually  in  hostilities  would  not 
be  likely  to  combine  for  common  defence  against  a  foe  who 
seemed  likely  to  destroy  them  both  in  detail  is  very 
improbable.  We  gather  from  several  incidents  in  the 
Bible  narrative  that  the  rivalry  between  Israel  and  Damas- 
cus, which,  after  all,  was  only  in  consonance  with  the 
order  of  things  in  Western  Asia  in  those  days,  was  not  so 
bitter  or  determined  as  to  prevent  an  occasional  inter- 
change of  courtesies,  in  spite  of  the  standing  cause  of 
quarrel  afforded  by  the  Syrian  occupation  of  Gilead,  and 
the  constant  irritating  raids  across  the  border  (2  K.  v.  2, 
cf.  vi.  23).  And  so  the  rapprochement  described  in  1  K. 
xx.,  with  the  three  years'  peace  that  followed,  must  have 
made  possible  not  only  passive  friendship,  but  ready  co- 
operation against  a  common  foe.1  Finally,  Wellhausen's 
theory  includes  the  assumption  that  it  was  the  Assyrian 
invasion  of  854  B.C.,  and  its  results,  which  "made  the 
situation  clear  "  to  Ahab,  and  suggested  to  him  the  pro- 
priety of  revolt  against  Syria.  But  a  study  of  Shal- 
maneser's  reports  shows  that  nothing  could  have  been  made 
clear  to  Ahab  thereby  except  the  military  superiority  of 
Assvria.  And  Damascus  was  not  in  particular  so  weakened 

•/  i. 

by  the  battle  as  to  invite  attack  from  an  inferior  foe.  On 
all  accounts,  therefore,  it  is  better  to  make  the  battle  of 
Karkar  coincident  with  the  first  truce  in  the  "fifty  years' 
war "  between  Damascus  and  Israel  than  to  make  it 
antedate  the  outbreak  of  hostilities. 

§  234.  The  importance  of  the  matter  under  present 
discussion  lies  not  simply  in  the  necessity  of  getting  a 
clear  idea  of  the  course  of  Israel's  fortunes.  The  correct 
solution  of  the  problem  would  also  afford  us  a  sure  basis 
for  chronological  calculation,  the  first  certain  synchronism 
in  the  history  of  the  monarchies  of  Western  Asia,  and, 
indeed,  in  the  history  of  the  world  generally.  Can  the 

1  This  frequent  change  of  reciprocal  attitude  between  neighbouring 
countries  in  Western  Asia  was,  no  doubt,  favoured  by  the  custom  of 
ceasing  hostilities  during  the  winter  season  (2  S.  xi.  1  ;  1  Chr.  xx.  1). 


280  THE   FIXING   OF   A   DATE  BOOK  VI 

exact  date  be  fixed  ?  It  may  with  great  probability.  The 
death  of  Ahab  took  place,  according  to  the  modern  nota- 
tion, two  years  (in  the  third  year)  after  the  peace  of  Aphek 
(1  K.  xxii.  If.).  The  latter  event  probably  took  place  in 
the  year  before  the  campaign  against  the  Assyrians,  and 
would  therefore  have  to  be  set  at  855  B.C.  Thus  the  end 
of  Ahab's  reign  would  fall  in  853  B.C.  Up  to  the  time  of 
Solomon  we  had  been  obliged  to  use  round  numbers  for 
dates,  but  counting  back  from  the  year  thus  ascertained  it 
has  been  possible  to  get  approximate  figures  for  the  inter- 
vening events ;  and,  from  this  time  onward,  with  the  help 
of  the  original  autograph  indications  of  the  Assyrian 
records,1  it  will  be  within  our  power  to  time  most  of  the 
principal  occurrences  still  more  exactly. 

1  See  Note  6  in  Appendix. 


CHAPTER   II 

ISRAEL  AND  THE  CONFLICTS  OF  ASSYRIA  AND  DAMASCUS 

§  235.  THE  Assyrian  invasion  of  854  B.C.  had  left  the 
relative  positions  of  the  Western  powers  unchanged.  It 
was  the  fateful  battle  of  Ramoth-Gilead  which  soon  after 
turned  the  scale  decisively  against  Israel  (§  215).  The 
successors  of  Ahab  were  still  less  able  than  he  to  realize 
the  ideal  conceived  in  the  ambitious  mind  of  Omri. 
Aha/iah,  his  son,  reigned  but  two  years  or  less  (853-852). 
Jehoram,  or  Joram  (853-842),  the  brother  of  Ahaziah,  was 
the  last  ruler  of  the  line.  He  had  been  acting  as  regent 
during  the  illness  of  Ahaziah.  He  continued  throughout 
the  policy  of  friendship  and  alliance  with  Judah,  of  which 
a  main  object  had  been  to  make  head  against  the  encroach- 
ments of  Damascus.  A  few  years  later,  Jehoshaphat  of 
Judah  was  succeeded  by  his  son  Jehoram  (849-842).  The 
identity  of  the  names  ("  Yahive  is  exalted")  is  an  indica- 
tion that  the  same  outward  reverence  for  Jehovah's  worship 
animated  both  kingly  houses.  Now  the  two  families  were 
still  further  assimilated  by  intermarriage,  Jehoram  of 
Judah  making  Athaliah,  the  sister  of  his  northern  name- 
sake, his  queen, —  a  step  which  shows,  among  other  tokens, 
how  little  distasteful  to  the  court  of  Judah  were  the 
characteristic  worship  and  practices  of  the  house  of  Ahab. 
The  attempt  to  recapture  Ramoth  had  been  the  supreme 
military  effort  of  the  Israelitish  combination ;  and,  though 
its  failure  did  not  dissolve  the  alliance,  it  proved  the 
superiority  of  Damascus  to  the  two  confederates  combined. 
It  also  brought  about  further  loss  to  Israel.  Moab,  which 

281 


282  LOSS   OF   MOAB  TO   ISRAEL  BOOK  VI 

had  been  tributary  to  North  Israel  under  Orari,  and  which, 
according  to  the  Stone  of  King  Mesha,1  had  succeeded  in 
recovering  some  of  its  territory  during  the  reign  of  Ahab, 
was  now  encouraged  to  break  out  into  open  revolt.  While 
Jehoshaphat  was  still  alive,  Joram  of  Israel  undertook  to 
recover  the  lost  possessions  and  punish  his  rebellious 
vassal.  Summoning  Jehoshaphat  to  his  aid,  who,  in  his 
turn,  secured  the  co-operation  of  the  subject  Edomites, 
they  dexterously  attacked  Moab  from  the  south,  after 
encompassing  the  Dead  Sea.  The  allies  were  at  first 
successful,  and  inflicted  a  defeat  upon  Mesha  so  terrible 
that  the  wrath  of  his  god  Chemosh  could  only  be  appeased 
by  the  sacrifice  of  his  own  son.  The  Hebrew  record  which 
furnishes  us  with  these  details  (2  K.  iii.)  does  not  add 
particulars  of  the  subsequent  events  of  the  campaign, 
except  to  say  that,  on  account  of  the  supposed  wrath  of 
Chemosh  against  Israel,  the  invaders  withdrew  from  the 
country  (v.  27) ;  in  other  words,  failed  to  bring  back  Moab 
to  its  allegiance.  Mesha  himself  relates  to  posterity  how 
he  rebuilt  several  cities  which  had  been  laid  waste  during 
the  Israelitish  suzerainty,  and  how  he  took  by  storm,  with 
the  customary  slaughter  of  the  inhabitants,  the  two  cities 
of  Ataroth  and  Nebo,  which  were  garrisoned  by  Gadites 
of  Israel.2 

§  236.  In  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat's  son  Jehoram,  the 
brother-in-law  of  Joram  of  Israel  (§  235),  the  control  of 
Edom  was  lost  to  Judah,  after  an  abortive  attempt  had 
been  made  by  the  Judaic  viceroy  (about  852  B.C.)  to 
re-establish  Solomon's  trade  by  the  Red  Sea  (1  K.  xxii. 
48).  Thus,  in  spite  of  the  alliance  and  affiliation  of  the 
princes  of  the  northern  and  southern  kingdoms,  their  reigns 
were  marked  by  political  decline.  Yet  Joram  of  Israel 
was  a  valiant  defender  of  his  realm  and  dynasty  against 
Aramaean  aggression.  His  ejection  from  the  Moabitish 

1  Lines  6  ff . 

2  Stone  of  Mesha,  1.  9  ff.     On  the  difficulty  of  reconciling  the  Moabite 
and  Biblical  account,  see  Professor  Davis  in  Hebraica,  April,  1891,  p.  178  ff. 


CH.  II,  §  236  REVOLT   OF   JEHU  283 

border  did  not  deter  him  from  carrying  out  the  traditional 
policy  of  his  house  with  regard  to  the  Israelitish  territory 
beyond  the  Jordan,  and  he  continued  till  the  end  of  his 
reign  to  keep  up  an  army  before  Ramoth-Gilead.  How 
desperate  were  his  case  and  his  efforts  we  may  gather  from 
the  fact  that,  while  defending  the  frontiers  of  his  kingdom 
on  the  east,  repeated  disasters  befell  his  arms  at  home,  and 
he  had  to  submit  to  a  prolonged  siege,  with  all  its  accom- 
panying horrors,  in  his  own  capital,  at  the  hands  of  the 
Syrians  under  Ben-hadad  II,  from  which  he  was  only 
delivered  through  a  groundless  panic  in  the  camp  of  the 
besiegers  (2  K.  vi.,  vii.).1  And  Ramoth  itself,  that 
coveted  landmark  of  Israel's  ancient  dominion  over  rich 
and  populous  Gilead,  became  an  instrument  of  fate  once 
more  against  the  doomed  and  failing  house  of  Ahab. 

o  o 

Joram  being  wounded  in  battle  against  Ben-hadad's  suc- 
cessor, Ilazael  (§  241),  his  general,  Jehu,  who  had  been 
twice  anointed  as  the  future  king  and  the  divinely 
appointed  supplanter  of  the  patriotic  but  religiously  dis- 
loyal dynasty  of  Omri,  being  left  in  charge  of  the  blockade  2 
of  that  fortress,  revolted  and  hastened  to  Samaria  with 
blood-thirsty  zeal  against  his  lord  and  all  his  court  and 
retainers.  Ahaziah,  the  son  of  Jehoram  of  Judah,  had  just 
come  to  the  throne. (842),  and  hastened  to  put  himself  and 
his  army  at  the  disposal  of  his  uncle  Joram,  in  pursuance 
of  the  established  policy.  He  found  him  at  his  summer 
palace  at  Jezreel,  where  he  was  seeking  repose  and  healing 
for  his  wounds.  Here  the  two  kings  were  surprised  by 
the  furious  onset  of  Jehu,  by  whose  hand  Joram  met 
immediate  death.  Ahaziah's  flight  was  soon  interrupted 
by  a  still  more  dastardly  stroke  at  the  order  of  the  usurper. 
The  first  event  of  international  importance  following  the 
revolt  was  the  necessary  result  of  the  defection  of  Jehu 
and  his  desertion  of  the  post  of  duty.  The  siege  of  that 

1  See  Note  5  in  Appendix. 

2  The  word  "kept,"  in  E.  V.  of  2  K.  ix.  14,  should  be  replaced  by 
"besieged,"  literally  "  watched"  ;  cf.  2  Sam.  xi.  16  and  Isa.  i.  8. 


284  ASSYRIANS   AGAIN   IN   THE   WEST  BOOK  VI 

stronghold  was  raised,  and  the  country  east  of  the  Jordan 
was  soon  wholly  occupied  by  the  Aramaeans  (2  K.  x.  32  f.), 
under  another  predestined  usurper,  the  no  less  truculent 
but  more  fortunate  Hazael. 

§  237.  The  reader  of  the  Bible  narrative  must  at  first 
find  it  difficult  to  understand  how  the  kings  of  Israel, 
crippled  as  they  were  by  loss  of  territory  and  population, 
exposed  continually  to  invasion  from  the  northeastern  side, 
and  actually  brought  more  than  once  to  the  verge  of 
national  extinction,  were  yet  able  to  keep  an  army  in  the 
field  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  and  lay  siege  repeatedly  to 
a  great  fortress  lying  in  what  was  then  an  enemy's  country. 
Here  again  the  monuments  of  Nineveh  give  us  welcome 
aid.  They  show  us  that  not  only  during  the  latter  part 
of  the  reign  of  Ahab,  but  twice  also  during  the  reign  of 
Joram,  the  Syrians  were  called  to  put  themselves  in  defence 
against  the  most  terrible  of  their  foes.  Shalmaneser,  in 
his  inscription  on  the  Black  Obelisk,  tells  us  briefly  of  his 
incursions  into  the  West-land.  During  the  three  years 
immediately  following  the  battle  of  Karkar  he  was  busied 
with  affairs  on  the  Northern  Tigris,  and  especially  in 
Babylonia,  where,  by  the  way,  he  came  into  contact  with 
the  Chaldseans  {Kalde),  who  were  forced  to  the  sea-shore 
by  the  terror  of  his  arms,  and  became  his  tributaries.1  In 
850  he  crossed  the  Euphrates  for  the  eighth  time,  but 
confined  himself  in  this  region  to  reducing  the  cities 
dependent  on  Carchemish.  The  next  year  (849)  found 
him  again  west  of  the  Euphrates,  in  the  "land  of  the 
Hettites."  The  country  about  Hamath  was  once  more 
laid  waste,  and  again  a  combination  of  "twelve  kings  of 
the  Hettite  country,"  with  Ben-hadad  at  their  head,  opposed 
him,  and  were  defeated  with  the  loss  of  10,000  men.  This 
was  in  the  eleventh  year  of  Shalmaneser.2  Two  years  later 
(846  B.C.)  he  made  an  expedition  to  Syria,  which  had  much 
the  same  character  and  result  as  that  of  849. 3 

i  Obel.  83  f.  a  Obel.  87  ff.  8  Obel.  91  f. 


CH.  H,  §  239    VICISSITUDES  OF  NORTHERN  ISRAEL  285 

§  238.  The  records  of  these  invasions  help  us  to  com- 
plete the  picture  of  the  political  situation  in  Palestine  and 
Syria  in  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century  B.C.  They  show 
us  how  it  was  that  the  wars  between  Israel,  alone  or  in 
alliance  with  Judah,  and  Damascus,  fierce  and  frequent  as 
they  were,  still  were  not  continuous ;  and  they  explain  to 
us  how  Israel  was  still  able  to  maintain  itself  and  escape 
what  seemed  imminent  annihilation  at  the  hands  of 
Damascus  while  the  latter  was  distracted  with  these 
Assyrian  wars.  We  do  not  learn,  however,  if  any  part 
was  taken  by  Israel  in  opposing  Shalmaneser.  Such  action 
on  the  part  of  Joram,  in  spite  of  his  normal  attitude 
towards  Damascus,  is  improbable  from  his  military  weak- 
ness. Yet  it  was  not  in  such  times  impossible,  as  we  learn 
from  the  example  of  Ahab.  Direct  evidence  on  the  point 
we  do  not  have.  Shalmaneser  speaks  of  the  "  dozen  kings  " 
who  opposed  him,  in  his  report  both  with  regard  to  the 
campaign  of  849  and  to  that  of  846.  But  this  is  manifestly 
a  round  number,  and  it  is  hardly  to  be  supposed  that 
exactly  the  same  combination  was  formed  on  these  occa- 
sions as  in  854.  The  question,  interesting  and  important 
as  it  is,  will  have  to  remain,  in  the  meanwhile,  undecided. 

§  239.  The  tragic  end  of  Joram  brings  us  to  the  close 
of  a  memorable  period  in  the  history  of  the  northern  king- 
dom, —  a  period  marked  by  a  more  intense  life  among  the 
leaders  of  the  people  than  was  manifested  there  before  or 
after.  In  the  political  sphere  we  can  see  how  dreams  of  a 
potent  monarchy  arose  in  the  mind  of  Omri,  the  founder 
of  Samaria,  and  the  creator  of  Samarian  history;  how  he 
extended  his  dominion  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan ;  and  how 
the  Aramaean  power  to  the  northeast,  rising  more  quickly 
than  his  own,  curbed  his  ambition,  crippled  his  strength, 
and  lowered  his  prestige.  We  see  how  his  son  Ahab 
widened  the  scope  of  national  relations,  secured  powerful 
alliances,  and,  under  the  influence  of  the  Tyrian  queen, 
bartered  the  hope  and  defence  of  Israel  for  the  glamour  and 
pageantry  of  a  sensual  and  deteriorating  worship ;  and  how 


286  LEADING  EVENTS   OF  THE   PERIOD         BOOK  VI 

he,  under  the  same  malign  working,  corrupted  the  sim- 
plicity of  the  national  manners,  and  even  outraged  the 
rights  of  an  Israelitish  freeholder  (1  K.  xxi.).  We  can 
see  the  results  of  the  offensive  and  defensive  alliance  with 
Judah,  which  was  a  characteristic  feature  of  this  period, 
and  mark  its  first  great  disaster  in  the  battle  that  cost 
Ahab  his  life.  We  can  follow  the  varying  fortunes  of  the 
Syrian  wars  through  the  reigns  of  his  short-lived  sons; 
and  in  its  chequered  progress  we  can  note  how  Damascus 
gains  steadily  upon  the  Hebrew  monarchies,  its  progress 
being,  however,  materially  impeded  by  two  sorts  of  checks ; 
namely,  unexpected  deliverances  granted  to  Israel,  and 
invasions  of  both  Northern  and  Southern  Syria  by  the 
Assyrians.  In  the  religious  and  ethical  sphere  we  see 
above  all,  in  the  personal  agency  and  manifold  activity  of 
Elijah  and  Elisha,  the  beginnings  of  the  great  prophetic 
movement,  which  was  not  only  intended  to  counteract  the 
spiritual  and  moral  degeneracy  of  the  nation,  but  also, 
through  the  faithful  remnant  in  the  true  Israel,  to  leaven 
all  mankind  with  truth  and  grace.  Moreover,  we  see  how, 
at  their  instigation,  the  cruel  and  rapacious  wars  between 
Israel  and  the  Aramaeans  were  mitigated  by  several  rare 
instances  of  generosity  and  forbearance,  so  that  their 
ministry  of  reform  and  purification  was  also  symbolical  of 
a  new  era  of  peace  and  concord  between  the  nations,  which 
the  literary  Prophets  of  a  later  day  were  more  amply  to 
illustrate. 

§  240.  The  death  of  the  last  of  the  family  of  Omri 
marks  a  decisive  turning-point  in  the  history  of  the 
northern  kingdom.  A  change  of  dynasty  effected  by  such 
violent  means  as  those  employed  by  Jehu  must  needs  give 
a  moral  and  material  shock  to  a  small  compact  state  like 
that  which  depended  for  its  preservation  mainly  upon  the 
defensibility  of  the  fortress  of  Samaria.  Jehu's  mission 
was  to  extirpate  the  worship  of  the  Canaanitic  Baal.  His 
remorseless  fierceness  and  impetuosity  bore  him  well 
through  the  slaughter  of  Joram  and  his  family  and  of  the 


CH.  II,  §  241      JEHU,  ASSYRIA,  AND   DAMASCUS  287 

idolatrous  priesthood.  But  the  task  of  governing  the 
kingdom  thus  usurped,  and  of  defending  it  from  eager 
and  superior  foes,  was  one  to  which  he  was  utterly  unequal. 
He  failed  to  conciliate  the  adherents  of  his  predecessor, 
and  so  far  was  he  from  reconciling  the  people  at  large  to 
his  rule,  that  three  generations  later  his  acts  of  blood- 
shed were  still  cited  for  reprobation  (Hos.  i.  4).  In  his 
foreign  relations  he,  as  we  shall  see  presently,  lowered  the 
standard  of  Israelitish  patriotism,  and  gave  a  lien  upon 
his  country  to  a  rapacious  power,  which  never  failed  to 
take  advantage  of  the  smallest  concession  from  any  com- 
munity, great  or  small.  In  other  words,  Jehu  took  the 
fatal  step,  at  the  very  beginning  of  his  reign,  of  making 
a  league  with  Assyria. 

§  241.  This  momentous  transaction,  not  recorded  in  the 
Hebrew  annals,  but  preserved  for  us  in  the  cuneiform 
records,  was,  of  course,  closely  connected  with  Syrian 
affairs.  Very  shortly  before  the  revolt  of  Jehu,  a  usurper 
came  also  to  the  throne  of  Damascus,  and  that  with  the 
cognizance,  if  not  with  the  direct  approval,  of  the  head  of 
the  reforming  party  in  Israel  (cf.  1  K.  xix.  15  and  2  K. 
viii.  13).  The  treachery  and  regicide  in  Damascus,  which 
had  set  an  example  so  speedily  emulated  in  Israel  (2  K. 
viii.,  ix.),  resulted  in  the  death  of  the  valiant  old  warrior 
Ben-hadad  II  (2  K.  viii.  15),  who  for  many  years  had 
maintained  his  city  and  country  at  the  head  of  all  the 
Syrian  principalities.  His  murderer  and  successor,  Hazael, 
was  even  more  terrible  in  war,  and  apparently  devoid  of 
the  milder  qualities  which  adorned  the  character  of  his 
renowned  victim.  His  warlike  and  courageous  temper 
was  shown  even  by  his  eagerness  to  take  the  supreme 
control  at  a  time  so  critical  for  the  nations  of  the  west. 
He  had  seen  one  after  another  of  the  rulers  of  Northern 
Syria  forced  to  acknowledge  the  headship  of  Shalmaneser, 
or  surrender  their  kingdom  and  their  lives.  He  had 
witnessed  Aleppo  and  Hamath  devastated,  and  the  latter, 
not  long  before  the  head  of  the  Aramaean  communities, 


288  HAZAEL   AND   THE   ASSYRIANS  BOOK  VI 

almost  annihilated,  and  Damascus  itself  left  with  heredi- 
tary foes  to  the  south  and  west,  and  the  armies  of  the 
invincible  Assyrians  about  to  descend  upon  it  from  the 
north.  The  first  onset  of  the  latter  he  was  immediately 
summoned  to  meet. 

§  242.  Since  846  B.C.  (see  §  237)  Shalmaneser  had 
visited  Northern  Syria  once  —  namely,  in  843  —  to  cut 
cedars  from  Mount  Amanus.1  Next  year  he  marched  di- 
rectly against  Damascus.  The  armies  met  near  Mount 
Senir,2  at  the  northern  end  of  Hermon,  where  Hazael  took 
his  stand  without  a  single  ally.  According  to  Shalman- 
eser's  own  accounts,3  Hazael  met  with  a  terrible  defeat, 
losing  16,000  men,  1121  chariots,  470  horse,  and  his  camp. 
Still,  Damascus  was  not  yet  taken :  the  Assyrian  monarch 
had  to  content  himself  with  cutting  down  Hazael's  parks 
and  gardens  outside  the  wall,  and  laying  waste  the  Hauran. 
In  another  expedition,  three  years  later,4  he  inflicted  a  final 
defeat  upon  Hazael,  according  to  his  own  story ;  but  it  was 
much  more  likely  a  drawn  battle.  At  best,  the  alleged 
victory  resulted  in  no  permanent  advantage  to  the  Assyr- 
ians. The  former  of  these  two  expeditions,  that  of  842 
B.C.,  is  of  special  interest  to  us  in  our  present  business. 
After  describing  his  defeat  of  Hazael,  and  the  ravaging  of 
the  adjacent  territory,  Shalmaneser  relates  that  he  marched 
to  the  sea-coast,  and  received  the  tribute  of  Tyre  and 
Sidon,  and,  lastly,  of  "Jehu,  son  of  Omri."5  This  state- 
ment, which  occurs  in  the  fragment  just  cited,  is  shown  to 
refer  to  Jehu,  king  of  Israel,  by  the  fact  that  on  the  famous 
Black  Obelisk  already  frequently  quoted,  containing  the 
condensed  annals  of  Shalmaneser,  there  is  found  a  sculp- 
tured representation  of  ambassadors  bearing  gifts  and 
presenting  them  to  the  Assyrian  king,  accompanied  by  an 

1  Obel.  96. 

2  Assyr.   Saniru.     Cf.   Sept.   2cmp.    Notice  the  perpetuation  of  the 
Amoritic  name  (Deut.  iii.  9). 

3  Obel.  97  ff.,  and  especially  the  fragment  III  R.  5  Nr.  6. 

4  Obel.  102  ff.  5  Ya-u-a  apal  Hu-um-ri. 


CH.  II,  §  243  JEHU   AND   THE    ASSYRIANS  289 

inscription  beginning  with  the  words :  "tribute  of  Jehu, 
son  of  Omri."  l 

§  243.  These  references  are  interesting  and  important 
from  several  points  of  view.  As  to  the  form  of  expression 
"son  of  Omri,"  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  while  the  term 
Sir'alai,  " Israelite,"  used  of  Ahab,  occurs  but  once  in  the 
recovered  inscriptions,  the  phrase  "  Beth  Omri "  is  the 
standing  designation  for  the  kingdom  of  Israel2  (§  212). 
As  to  Jehu  himself,  the  notice  of  the  Assyrian  king  sets 
the  cruel  and  imperious  usurper  and  reformer  before  us  in 
a  new  light,  that  of  a  fawning  suppliant.  His  name  is 
coupled  in  the  list  of  tributaries  witli  those  of  the  rulers  of 
subject  nations ;  but  we  have  no  evidence  that  he  was 
subdued  by  the  Assyrians.  In  839  B.C.,  when  Shalmaneser 
had  his  second  great  encounter  with  Hazael,  and  Tyre  and 
Sidon  sent  costly  gifts  to  the  conqueror,  Jehu  for  the 
second  time  may  have  done  the  same,  still  cherishing  the 
hope  of  securing  in  the  Great  King  an  ally  who  would 
crush  Syria  and  spare  and  protect  Israel.  How  fallacious, 
in  any  case,  that  expectation  was,  may  be  learned  from  the 
Biblical  narrative,  properly  understood  by  the  help  of  the 
Assyrian  annals.  The  summary  statement  of  2  K.  x.  32  f. 
(cf.  §  230)  tells  us  that  Hazael  smote  Israel  in  all  its 
borders,  and  particularizes  his  complete  occupation  of  all 
the  country  east  of  Jordan  as  far  south  as  the  valley  of  the 
Arnon,  which  had  never  been  in  any  sense  subject  to 
Israel;  and  we  may  infer  from  a  later  passage  (2  K.  xii. 
17)  that  the  western  borders  were  also  seriously  encroached 
upon.  In  fact,  his  march  upon  the  Philistines  there  alluded 
to  must  have  been  made  through  the  valley  of  Jezreel.  so 
that  we  must  think  of  the  northern  kingdom  as  being 
confined  to  the  hill  country  of  Ephraim  and  the  territory 
about  Samaria.  This  state  of  things  is  explained  by  the 
fact  that,  after  the  expedition  of  839,  the  Assyrians  did 


1  ma-dn-tu  sa  Ya-n-a  apal  Hu-itm-ri-i  (Lay.  98,  2). 

2  Cf .  the  name  of  the  kingdom  in  Northern  Syria,  Bit  Adini  (§  227). 


290 


not  appear  again  in  Syria  proper.  At  the  time  of  the 
double  usurpation  of  Jehu  and  Hazael,  Shalmaneser  was 
just  at  the  middle  of  his  reign,  and  for  the  last  fifteen 
years  of  his  life  he  seems  to  have  renounced  the  hope  of 
bringing  the  West-land  under  Assyrian  control.  Two 
main  motives  must  have  determined  him.  He  found  it 
necessary  to  conserve  and  consolidate  his  empire  before 
seeking  further  to  extend  its  borders.  Affairs  nearer 
home  required  constant  attention,  and  by  reason  of  the 
continual  urgency  of  discontented  tribes,  who  demurred 
to  the  supremacy  of  the  Assyrian  gods,  his  best  troops 
were  in  constant  requisition  away  from  the  new  battle- 
ground on  the  Mediterranean  coast.  The  utmost  that 
could  be  done  west  of  the  River  was  to  confirm  his 
conquests  in  Northern  Syria  and  Cilicia.  This  was 
accomplished  by  expeditions  made  in  835,  834, 1  and  832 
B.C.,  the  last-named  being  conducted  by  his  general-in- 
chief .  Another  reason  for  his  quitting  this  field  of  action 
was,  doubtless,  the  prowess  and  strength  of  Damascus. 
In  spite  of  the  claims  of  victory  made  by  the  Assyrian 
invader  in  his  annals,  it  is  certain  that  his  losses  were 
very  great,  and  that  his  successes  did  not  lead,  as  else- 
where, to  control  of  new  territory  or  permanent  increase 
of  revenue ;  and  it  is  quite  possible  that,  after  the  engage- 
ment of  839,  he  found  it  advisable  to  evacuate  the  Syrian 
territory.  Such  freedom  from  molestation,  which  Hazael 
doubtless  regarded  as  a  triumph  for  Syria,  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  utilized  fully  by  that  ambitious  monarch,  who  thus 
brought  his  kingdom  to  a  height  of  power  and  influence 
never  before  or  after  reached  by  an  Aramaean  community. 
Not  only  was  the  ancient  and  beautiful  capital  of  the  kings 
of  Damascus  retained,  in  spite  of  defeat  after  defeat  and 
the  loss  of  one  ally  after  another,  but  Hazael,  who,  like  his 
predecessor,  had  never  once  submitted  to  Shalmaneser,  was 
soon  able  to  reclaim  the  Hauran,  to  secure  Bashaii  and 

1  The  expedition  of  834  is  notable  for  the  conquest  of  Tarsus  in  Cilicia. 
It  appears  under  the  form  Tar-zi  (Obel.  138).     See  KGF.  241 


CH.  II,  §  245     SUFFERING   ISRAEL   AND   PUUl'HECY  291 

Gilead,  to  encroach  upon  Moab,  to  almost  annihilate  Israel, 
to  destroy  one  of  the  great  cities  of  the  Philistines,1  to 
range  freely  over  the  whole  of  Judah,  and  to  dictate  to 
Jerusalem  itself  the  most  humiliating  terms  of  submission, 
receiving  from  the  terrified  king  Jehoash  the  richest  spoil 
of  his  palace  and  temple. 

§  244.  The  calamities  which  the  aggression  of  Damas- 
cus, after  its  reprieve  and  rehabilitation,  brought  upon 
Israel  are  indicated  or,  rather,  faintly  suggested,  by  the 
sacred  annalist ;  but  we  are  not  left  to  the  narrative  alone 
for  a  picture  of  the  desolation  and  ruin  that  were  wrought. 
We  can  listen  to  the  voice  of  Prophecy,  which  now 
emerges  in  the  drama  of  Israel's  history,  to  reveal  the  mo- 
mentous issues  of  the  action,  to  express  the  essential  pathos 
of  the  tragedy,  and  to  enforce  the  moral  of  every  new  event. 
Two  brief  passages  give  us  an  indispensable  supplement 
to  the  historical  statements  of  fact;  the  one  describing  the 
memorable  scene  where  Elisha  predicts  to  Hazael,  just 
before  his  accession  to  the  blood-stained  throne,  the  misery 
and  suffering  which  he  is  to  bring  upon  Israel  (2  K.  viii. 
12),  and  the  other,  two  generations  later,  containing  a 
vivid  reminiscence  of  the  horrors  of  the  time,  from  the  pen 
of  one  of  the  first  of  the  literary  Prophets  (Amos  i.  3-5). 

§  245.  Such  was  the  inglorious  ending  of  the  reign  of 
Jehu.  His  propitiation  of  the  Assyrians  had  profited  him 
nothing,  but  had  rendered  him,  as  their  ally,  more  odious 
in  the  eyes  of  Hazael,  who,  now  that  danger  from  the 
common  foe  of  all  the  independent  western  peoples  seemed 
to  be  past,  visited  with  remorseless  vengeance  those  nations 
which  had  once  joined  the  league  for  mutual  protection 
and  had  then  left  Damascus  to  fight  the  battle  alone. 
Jehoahaz  (815-799  B.C.),  the  son  of  Jehu,  succeeded  to  the 
broken  fortunes  and  hopeless  cause  of  his  father,  and 
during  the  greater  part  of  his  reign  was  compelled  to 
accept  from  Hazael  and  his  son,  Ben-hadad  III,  the  hardest 

1  For  the  taking  of  Gath  aiid  the  invasion  of  Judah,  see  2  K.  xii.  17  f.  ; 
2  Chr.  xxiv.  23  f. 


292  PROSTRATION   AND    RELIEF   OF   ISRAEL       BOOK  VI 

conditions  yet  imposed  upon  any  king  of  Israel.  The 
sacred  historian,  who,  after  the  fashion  of  Biblical  nar- 
rators, characterizes  a  whole  period  by  citing  a  concrete 
instance  or  two  as  indicative  and  representative,  tells  us 
how  "  there  had  been  left  to  Jehoahaz  of  the  people  only 
fifty  horsemen  and  ten  chariots  and  ten  thousand  footmen ; 
for  the  king  of  Syria  had  made  them  to  be  trodden  down 
like  dust " 1  (2  K.  xiii.  7).  This  picture  becomes  most 
telling  \vhen  we  compare  the  condition  of  Israel,  as  related 
to  Damascus,  with  what  we  learned  from  Shalmaneser's 
report  of  the  battle  of  Karkar,  about  forty  years  before  the 
accession  of  Jehoahaz.  During  Ahab's  reign  Israel  was 
scarcely  the  equal  of  Damascus,  and  yet  it  could  put  into 
the  field  for  the  defence  of  the  West-land  two  thousand 
chariots.  That  its  force  was  reduced  to  the  mere  nominal 
figure  of  ten  chariots  and  fifty  horsemen  does  not  mean 
that  the  resources  of  the  country  and  its  military  spirit 
had  really  come  to  the  vanishing-point.  What  the  com- 
parison proves  is  that  Syria  had  finally  made  the  northern 
kingdom  its  vassal,  and  to  render  it  incapable  of  further 
harm  had  deprived  it  of  the  most  effective  means  of 
carrying  on  an  offensive  campaign. 

§  246.  But  relief  came  when  it  was  least  expected,  and 
when  it  seemed  that  at  last  Israel  could  lift  up  its  head  no 
more  among  the  nations,  and  that  Damascus  was  to  realize 
its  aim  of  bringing  the  whole  of  Palestine  into  subjection. 
The  means  of  deliverance  are  indicated  in  the  Biblical 
narrative  only  in  a  very  indefinite  way,  but  the  Assyrian 
annals  once  more  furnish  us  with  the  desired  illumination. 
The  passage  in  question,  which  immediately  precedes  the 
verses  just  quoted,  reads  as  follows:  "And  Jehoahaz 
entreated  Jehovah,  and  Jehovah  listened  to  him,  for  he 
saw  the  oppression  of  Israel,  for  the  king  of  Syria  had 
pressed  him  sore ;  and  Jehovah  gave  to  Israel  a  deliverer 

1  In  order  to  bring  out  the  connection  clearly,  and  to  indicate  the  order 
of  events,  it  is  necessary  to  translate  with  the  pluperfect,  which  is,  in  fact, 
a  direct  continuation  of  the  same  construction  in  v.  4. 


CM.   II,  §  247  CONDITION   OF   ASSYRIA  293 

and  they  came  out  from  under  the  power  of  Syria,  and  the 
children  of  Israel  dwelt  in  their  tents  (i.e.  in  their  own 
houses)  as  in  the  days  of  yore."  It  will  be  seen  that  the 
name  of  the  deliverer  by  whose  interference  Israel  was 
redeemed  from  its  humiliating  servitude  is  not  mentioned. 
In  fact,  the  whole  manner  of  presentation,  so  different  from 
the  particularity  of  statement  characteristic  of  the  Bible 
narratives,  suggests  a  personage  lying  beyond  the  ordinary 
range  of  Israelitish  association,  and  perhaps  unknown  by 
name  to  the  sacred  writer.  The  fact  seems  to  be  that  it 
was  a  contemporary  king  of  Assyria.  Another  brief  glance 
at  the  history  of  that  country  must  now  be  made. 

§  247.  Our  sketch  of  the  military  activity  of  Shal- 
maneser  II  showed  plainly  that  that  monarch,  enterprising 
and  ambitious  as  he  was,  and  eager  to  extend  the  sway  of 
Asslmr  to  the  limits  of  southwestern  Asia,  yet  found  it 
impossible  to  secure  any  permanent  footing  beyond  Central, 
or  even  Northern,  Syria.  His  successor,  jSamsl-Rammdn 
IV  ("Ramman  is  my  sun,"  825-812  B.C.),  found  that  the 
half-subjugated  provinces  bequeathed  to  him  by  his  father 
constituted  a  legacy  so  uncertain  and  divided  that  its 
adjustment  and  administration  left  him  but  little  oppor- 
tunity for  outside  conquests.  Shalmaneser  had,  in  fact, 
undertaken  to  do  too  much,  nor  was  the  political  system  of 
Assyria  as  yet  sufficiently  developed  to  justify  the  vast 
enterprises  which  the  ambitious  conquerors  of  the  time  so 
persistently  entered  upon.  The  old  warrior  had  been,  in 
fact,  unable  to  keep  his  empire  well  in  hand  in  his  later 
years.  The  conduct  of  his  campaigns  was  left  to  his 
commander-m-ehief,  who  apparently  was  getting  so  much 
power  in  his  hands  that  a  revolt  on  the  part  of  Shal- 
maneser's  eldest  son  found  many  abettors  among  the  dis- 
contented people,  to  whom  a  firm  government  was  the 
prime  condition  of  social  prosperity,  as  well  as  their  first 
political  postulate.  The  closing  period  of  the  old  king's 
reign  was  thus  so  embittered  by  domestic  strife  that  the 
last  four  years  are  represented  by  a  blank  in  the  annalistic 


294  SH AM SHI-R AMMAN  BOOK  VI 

record,  which  breaks  off  in  829  B.C.  How  formidable  the 
rebellion  was  may  be  learnt  from  the  list  of  communities 
concerned  in  it,  embracing  several  cities  in  Assyria  proper, 
such  as  Nineveh  itself,  and  Asshur,  as  well  as  such  widely 
separated  districts  as  Hainath  in  the  West,  and  Amedi 
(the  modern  Diarbekr)  on  the  Upper  Tigris.  Our  informa- 
tion about  this  significant  uprising  is  derived  from  the 
inscription  of  Shamshi-Ramman  himself,  upon  whom,  as 
the  second  son,  devolved  the  duty  of  suppressing  it.  This 
task  he  successfully  accomplished,  bringing  back  to  their 
allegiance  the  rebellious  cities,  twenty-seven  in  number.1 
The  rest  of  his  warlike  enterprises  during  his  compara- 
tively short  reign  of  thirteen  years  were  directed  to  secur- 
ing and  extending  the  territory  claimed  by  Assyria  in  the 
north  and  northeast,  where  the  rising  power  of  Armenia 
excited  his  apprehensions,  as  well  as  in  the  east  and  south. 
His  last  expedition  was  aimed  against  Babylon,  though  he 
does  not  report  that  he  actually  invaded  Babylonian  terri- 
tory. What  he  mainly  intended  was  to  vitally  cripple 
that  kingdom  by  destroying  its  source  of  military  supply, 
which  was  furnished  by  the  hardy  inhabitants  of  the 
eastern  and  northeastern  mountains.  After  successful 
operations  in  the  territory  bordering  upon  Media,  the 
Babylonian  king  roused  himself  up  to  a  great  effort,  and 
with  a  large  force  of  auxiliaries,  composed  chiefly  of 
Aramaeans,  Elamites,  and  Chaldseans,  took  his  stand  by  a 
small  stream  called  Daban,  not  far  from  Baghdad.  The 
allies  were  defeated,  but  it  does  not  appear  that  Babylonia 
itself  was  invaded.  The  annals  of  Shamshi-Ramman  2  do 
not  date  his  several  enterprises,  and  this  is  the  last  which 
they  record.  But  we  learn  from  one  of  the  Eponym  lists 
that  he  sent  an  expedition  against  the  Chaldeans  in  813 
B.C.,  and  another  against  Babylon  itself  in  the  following 
year,  the  last  of  his  .reign.  His  achievements  were  not 

IIK.  29,  39-53. 

2  I  K.  29-31,  a  stele  now  in  the  Br.  Museum  engraven  in  archaic 
characters. 


CH.  II,  §  248     RAMMAN-NIBARl   AND   HIS   POLICY  295 

insignificant  or  of  mere  transitory  influence.  It  is  note- 
worthy that,  while  he  pushed  as  far  eastward  as  the  shores 
of  the  Caspian  Sea,  the  country  west  of  the  Euphrates  was 
left  entirely  undisturbed.  The  effect  of  this  immunity 
from  invasion  during  the  whole  of  his  reign  and  the  last 
fourteen  years  of  that  of  his  predecessor  we  have  already 
seen.  We  now  have  to  tell  how  the  West-land  fared 
under  his  successor. 

§  248.  Ramman-nirari  ("  Ramman  is  my  helper  "),  the 
third  of  that  name,  came  to  the  throne  in  his  youth,  his 
father  having  died  early  in  life.  His  reign  of  twenty- 
eight  years  (811-783  B.C.)  was  signalized  by  the  extension 
of  the  empire  beyond  the  furthest  limits  attained  by  any 
previous  Assyrian  ruler.  The  notices  of  his  reign  are 
quite  scanty,1  as  far  as  they  have  been  as  yet  recovered; 
but  while  they  fail  to  furnish  us  with  the  details  of  his 
numerous  warlike  enterprises,  they  give  a  clear  general 
picture  of  the  range  of  his  conquests.  He  proceeded 
steadily  upon  the  lines  laid  down  by  his  four  predecessors. 
His  subject  states  were  divided  by  himself  into  three 
groups,  according  to  their  geographical  direction.  These 
were,  first,  those  in  the  northeast  and  east,  whither  he  sent 
no  less  than  thirteen  expeditions,  eight  of  them  being 
directed  against  Media  alone.  His  conquests  here,  and  in 
the  more  northerly  country  lying  east  of  Lake  Urmia,  were 
so  extensive  as  to  justify  his  claim  to  have  subdued  all  the 
territory  as  far  as  the  Caspian  Sea.  The  second  group 
included  the  countries  lying  to  the  west  of  the  Euphrates, 
and  here  he  made  good  his  boast  to  have  conquered  all  the 
kingdoms  between  that  river  and  the  Mediterranean.  He 
enumerates  as  belonging  to  the  Hettite  country  and  the 
West-land,  Tyre,  Sidon,  Omri-land  (§  212,  243),  Edom, 
and  Philistia,  besides  making  special  reference  to  his 
conquest  of  Damascus.  The  third  group  contains  the 
Chaldaean  principalities,  to  which  he  seems  to  have  sent 

1  Published  I  R.  35,  Nrs.  1,  2,  3,  4.  All  except  the  very  brief  Nr.  4 
(a  brick  inscription  froru  Nineveh)  were  found  in  Xinirud. 


290  OPERATIONS   IN   CHALD^EA  BOOK  VI 

but  one  expedition  and  that  of  no  great  circumstance,  since 
he  merely  claims  that  he  imposed  tribute  upon  them  and 
that  they  acknowledged  his  suzerainty.  The  visit  to 
Chaldsea  in  803 l  was  probably  made  for  the  purpose  of 
settling  some  local  disturbance.  In  all  likelihood,  the 
work  of  subduing  the  Chaldseans  was  accomplished  in  his 
first  year,  in  completion  of  the  final  operations  of  his 
father,  and  so  their  country  was  kept  in  subjection  by 
garrisons  during  his  life.  We  may  even  conclude  that 
Ramman-nirari  was  in  this  acting  in  the  interest  of  Baby- 
lonia as  well  as  Assyria,  and  that,  since  the  defeat  of  the 
forces  allied  against  his  father,  the  two  countries  were 
united  in  close  friendship. 

§  249.  A  remarkable  circumstance  mentioned  in  an 
inscription  2  made  by  one  of  the  highest  offices  of  Ramman- 
nirari  is  of  interest  in  this  connection,  and  is  also  of 
special  importance  to  students  of  classical  literature.  The 
story,  or,  rather,  stories  of  Semiramis,3  the  wife  of  Ninus, 
retailed  by  Greek  writers,  passed  until  a  comparatively 
late  period  for  genuine  history,  and  the  accounts  of  her 
marvellous  achievements  in  war,  architecture,  and  irriga- 
tion, though  on  the  face  of  them  absurd,  and  out  of 
harmony  with  anything  ever  known  of  national  develop- 
ment, were  accepted  with  almost  as  much  credulity  by 
modern  scholars  up  to  the  present  century,  as  by  the 
contemporaries  of  the  Greek  historians.  The  inscription 
just  mentioned  reduces  the  heroine  to  her  actual  historic 
sphere  and  range,  being  at  the  same  time  the  sole  reference 
to  her  in  the  recovered  inscriptions.  It  also  gives  us  some 
suggestion  of  the  basis  of  fact  upon  which  the  stupendous 
mass  of  fable  was  built.  Sammu-rdmat  is  referred  to  by 
the  official  in  question,  who  was  governor  of  Kalah  and 

1  The  Eponym  notice  for  this  year,  "to  the  seashore,"  probably  refers 
to  the  Persian  Gulf. 

«  I  R.  35,  Nr.  2. 

3  For  the  history  of  the  myth  and  its  later  treatment,  see  Rawlinson, 
Five  Monarchies,  II,  120  f. 


CH.  II,  §  249  "SEMIRAMIS"  297 

several  other  important  cities,  as  "the  lady  of  the  palace 
and  his  mistress."  Her  name  follows  immediately  that  of 
Ramman-nirari,  and  the  writer  prays  for  the  long  life  of 
them  both,  no  other  names  than  theirs  and  his  own  being 
mentioned.  The  reference  is  apparently  to  the  wife  of  the 
king,  and  not  to  his  mother.  The  mention  of  her  name, 
when  it  occurs,  opens  up  a  wide  perspective  to  the  his- 
torical imagination.  The  inscription  is  written  upon  a 
statue  of  Nebo  and  is  dedicated  to  that  god.  This  agrees 
with  the  Eponym  list  for  787  B.C.,  which  states  that  in 
that  year  "Nebo  made  his  entry  into  the  new  temple."  It 
further  harmonizes  with  the  friendly  relations  subsisting 
between  Assyria  and  Babylon,  that  Nebo  was  properly  a 
Babylonian  god,  the  protectorate  exercised  by  Assyria 
being  confirmed  and  fostered  by  the  adoption  of  the  Baby- 
lonian deity,  which  of  itself  implies  an  attempted  unifica- 
tion of  the  two  peoples.  It  is  instructive  to  note,  what 
Tiele  has  pointed  out,1  that,  before  this,  Nebo  was  not  men- 
tioned in  any  Assyrian  inscription,  and  that  hereafter  not 
only  is  he  frequently  invoked,  but  proper  names  occur  with 
"Nebo"  as  one  of  the  elements,  just  as  had  always  been 
the  case  in  Babylonian  documents.  Henceforward,  there 
is  also  to  be  observed  a  community  of  interest  between  the 
two  countries  not  existing  since  the  times  of  the  early 
affiliations  (§  175).  Now,  as  it  was  the  rule  that  treaties 
of  alliance  were  cemented  by  intermarriage  between  the 
reigning  families,  what  is  more  probable  than  that  Ramman- 
niraii,  who,  as  we  have  seen,  came  to  the  throne  as  a  youth, 
should,  after  his  warlike  affairs  with  Babylonia  were 
happily  closed,  have  secured  the  newly  made  friendship 
by  wedding  the  daughter  or  sister  of  his  late  rival?  This, 
if  a  fact,  explains  as  nothing  else  can,  the  most  unaccount- 
able thing  in  the  whole  legendary  cycle  which  has  Semi- 
ramis  as  the  theme, — the  statement  that  she  ruled  over 
both  Babylon  and  Nineveh.  Another  point  that  may  be 
mentioned,  is  that  the  extraordinary  range  of  conquest 

i  BAG.  p.  212. 


298  ASSYRIANS   AGAIN   IN  THE    WEST  BOOK  VI 

attributed  in  the  Greek  stories  to  this  famous  queen,  while 
plainly  the  result  of  a  confusion  with  the  Persian  subjuga- 
tion of  the  nations  as  far  eastward  as  India,  may  be 
originally  due  to  the  circumstance  that  the  husband  of 
Sammuramat  claimed  rightly  a  wider  extent  of  possessions 
than  any  of  his  predecessors.  Finally,  this  unique  heroine 
must  have  really  been  a  personage  of  exceptional  promi- 
nence and  importance,  since  queens  or  princesses,  -or,  in 
fact,  women  of  any  degree,  are  never  mentioned  by  name 
in  the  Assyrian  monuments.1 

§  250.  We  must  return,  however,  to  the  affairs  of  the 
"West.  Ramman-niraii's  succinct  report,  as  has  been 
already  stated,  speaks  of  the  conquest  of  the  whole  of  Pal- 
estine and  Syria.  At  least  five  campaigns  seem  to  have 
been  carried  on  in  this  region,  according  to  the  Eponym 
chronicle.  At  any  rate,  five  years  were  occupied  in  the 
work  of  subjugation,  806-803  and  797  B.C.  The  objec- 
tive point  in  806  was  Arpad,  in  North-Middle  Syria,  where 
the  Assyrians  seem  to  have  met  with  considerable  resist- 
ance, since  the  close  of  the  next  year  finds  them  occupied 
at  the  neighbouring  city  of  f  Azaz  (Hazazu).  The  year  804 
brings  them  to  the  Phoenician  territory,  and  the  record  for 
803  ("to  the  Sea-shore")  appears  to  show  the  completion 
of  the  march  along  the  Mediterranean.  The  claim  made  of 
the  conquest  of  Syria  (mat  Hatte'),  Tyre  and  Sidon,  as  well 
as  Philistia  (Pa?asfw),  are  thus  accounted  for;  and  it  was 
doubtless  in  connection  with  the  "  Sea-coast "  campaign 
that  Edom  (TIdumu)  was  brought  to  subjection.  Israel, 
or  "Omri-land,"  and  the  kingdom  of  Damascus,  were 
apparently  subdued  in  797  B.C.,  as  the  Eponym  notice  for 
that  year  is  the  only  one  that  seems  to  suit  the  conditions. 
The  furthest  point  reached  by  that  expedition  is  the  city 
Mansudti,  which  has  been  located  by  the  help  of  geograph- 
ical lists,2  in  Israelitish  territory,  in,  or  near,  the  plain  of 
Jezreel.  Israel  was  thus  apparently  invaded  after  the 
subjugation  of  Damascus,  the  victorious  army  having 

1  See  Note  7  in  Appendix.  2  n  K.  53,  39.  57.  59. 


CH.  II.  §  251  CONQUEST   OF   DAMASCUS  299 


marched  \vestward,  and  secured  by  the  submission  of 
Samaria,  the  allegiance  of  virtually  the  whole  of  the  West. 
Judali  and  the  other  smaller  kingdoms  of  Moab  and 
Ammon  he  does  not  enumerate,  and  they  were,  in  all 
likelihood,  not  interfered  with,  though  they  may  have 
sent  propitiatory  presents. 

§  251.  The  conquest  of  Damascus  was  the  most  impor- 
tant event  in  the  history  of  all  that  time,  and  one  would 
suppose  that  Ramman-nirari  regarded  it  as  the  great 
achievement  of  his  life,  since  it  is  the  only  exploit  of 
which  he  makes  special  mention  in  the  summary  of  his 
warlike  enterprises.  Who  the  king  of  Damascus  at  the 
time  was,  we  cannot  say  with  certainty.  The  word  Mari\ 
which  designates  him,  means  in  Aramaic  "lord,"  and  it 
may  be  merely  the  first  name  of  his  title,  so  that  the 
possibility  of  identifying  him  with  the  third  Ben-hadad  of 
the  Bible,  the  son  of  Hazael1  (2  K.  xiii.  24),  is  not 
excluded.  This  seems  to  be,  indeed,  demanded  by  the 
Biblical  narrative,  as  we  shall  see  presently.  His  final 
capitulation  marks  the  most  important  era  in  the  history 
of  the  Damascene  kingdom;  not  that  it  brought  the  capital 
into  the  permanent  possession  of  the  Assyrians,  but  because 
it  broke  the  power  of  Syria,  after  many  years  of  resistance 
to  the  Eastern  invaders,  and  many  years,  also,  of  pre- 
dominance over  the  neighbouring  kingdoms.  This,  as 
well  as  its  consequences,  explains  the  significance  which 
the  triumph  evidently  had  in  the  eyes  of  the  victor. 
Moreover,  it  must  have  been  the  last  of  a  series  of  defeats 
sustained  during  the  seven  years'  war,  and  was  therefore 
all  the  more  calamitous  for  Damascus.2 

1  There  is  no  room  for  Mari  unless  this  is  done,  since  Ben-hadad  III 
followed  Hazael  immediately.    The  name  Ben-hadad  was  probably  assumed 
in  emulation  of  Ben-hadad  II. 

2  The  brief  records  of  the  Eponym  lists  note,  as  a  rule,  only  one  cam- 
paign in  each  year,  the  one  which  seemed  of  most  importance  (perhaps 
on  account  of  the  presence  of  the  kin.?  as  the  leader).     It  is  fair  to  con- 
clude that  between  803  and  797  other  military  movements  were  made, 
resulting  in  steady  encroachments  upon  the  Syrian  capital. 


300  BELIEF   AND   SUBJECTION   OF   ISRAEL        BOOK  VI 

§  252.  How  well  all  this  illustrates  the  meagre  narra- 
tive of  the  Book  of  Kings!  Jehoahaz,  as  we  have  seen 
(§  2-16),  was  granted  a  certain  measure  of  reprieve  from 
the  galling  oppression  of  the  Syrians.  The  relief  was  due 
to  the  crippling  of  the  resources  of  Damascus  by  the 
aggressive  warfare  waged  by  the  forces  of  Asshur  during 
the  closing  years  of  the  ninth  century,  and  the  "  deliverer  " 
(2  K.  xiii.  5;  cf.  v.  23)  was  none  other  than  the  redoubt- 
able Ramman-nirari  himself.  During  the  reign  of  the 
next  king  of  Israel,  Joash,  who  came  to  the  throne  in  or 
about  799  B.C.,  still  further  relief  was  granted;  Syria  was 
defeated  in  three  successive  battles  (2  K.  xiii.  25 ;  cf .  v. 
14-19),  and  JBash  recovered  the  cities  which  his  father 
had  lost.  The  possibility  of  recuperation  and  rehabilita- 
tion was  plainly  due  to  the  collapse  of  the  Syrian  power 
under  Mari-Ben-hadad  III,  through  the  surrender  of  the 
city  and  its  enormous  treasures  in  797 ;  and  the  continued 
prosperity  of  Israel  under  Joash  and  his  successor  became 
only  possible  with  the  prolonged  humiliation  of  its  ancient 
rival  and  oppressor. 

§  253.  The  question  naturally  suggests  itself:  How 
does  it  happen  that  the  Bible  records  nothing  of  this  great 
invasion  and  these  prolonged  military  operations,  especially 
when  not  merely  S}-ria  (as  on  previous  occasions),  but 
Palestine  proper,  was  attacked  and  reduced  to  subjection  ? 
The  explanation  is  that,  as  the  narrative  in  its  present 
form  was  compiled  at  a  later  date,  only  so  much  historical 
information  was  transferred  from  the  official  annals  as  bore 
directly  upon  the  religious  history  of  the  people ;  and  as 
the  influence  of  this  Assyrian  invasion,  even  though  Israel 
itself  had  now  the  invader  on  its  soil  for  the  first  time,  was 
not  permanently  felt,  at  least  in  tangible  results,  no  men- 
tion was  made  of  it  in  the  final  record.  Moreover,  it  is 
plain  that  Damascus  and  Northern  Palestine  bore  the 
brunt  of  the  attack,  that  the  march  across  the  borders  of 
Israel,  like  that  along  the  sea-coast,  was  followed  by 
immediate  submission,  and  that  there  was  no  prolonged 


CH.  II,  §  254          RAPID   CHANGES  IN  JUDAH  301 

occupation  or  serious  loss  of  men  or  territory,  such  as  were 
caused  by  later  invasions.  For  the  rest,  it  is  probable  that 
Israel  and  the  other  Western  states,  now  become  subject 
to  Assyria,  paid  their  allotted  tribute  till  the  death  of 
Ramman-niraii  (783),  which  coincides  nearly  with  the  end 
of  the  reign  of  Joash. 

§  254.  The  kingdom  of  Judah,  as  we  have  seen,  is  not 
alluded  to  in  the  catalogue  of  subject  nations  drawn  up  by 
the  Assyrian  conqueror.  Its  secluded  position,  and  espe- 
cially the  diminution  of  its  prestige  and  resources  during 
the  troublous  times  that  followed  the  murder  of  Ahaziah 
(842  B.C.),  made  it  an  object  of  little  consequence  to  the 
Great  King;  Jerusalem  was  not  the  coveted  vantage- 
ground  which  it  afterwards  became,  for  the  Assyrian 
policy  had  not  yet  practically  included  defence  or  offence 
against  Egypt,  having  indeed  just  begun  to  appreciate  the 
importance  of  the  magnificent  site  of  Samaria  for  the  control 
of  Palestine.  The  fidelity  of  the  priests  rescued  the  feeble 
state  by  the  last  resort  of  revolution  and  bloodshed  from 
the  oppression,  as  well  as  the  religious  apostasy,  of  the 
queen  Athaliah  (842-836),  and  the  political  and  moral 
rehabilitation,  chiefly  through  reforms  in  worship  directed 
by  the  high-priest  Jehoiada  (2  K.  xi.,  xii.),  went  bravely 
on  during  the  earlier  years  of  Jehoash  (830-797),  the 
surviving  infant  son  of  Ahaziah,  whom  they  had  secretly 
nurtured  as  the  rightful  heir.  The  country  was,  however, 
again  brought  to  the  verge  of  destruction  by  the  ravages  of 
the  Syrians  (§  243).  But  the  humiliation  and  final  over- 
throw of  Damascus,  which  were  accomplished  during  the 
last  year  of  the  reign  of  Jehoash,  brought  relief  to  Judah 
as  well  as  Israel;  and  under  his  successor,  Amaziah  (797- 
758),  it  began  to  make  its  way  to  a  position  of  power  and 
respect  among  the  Western  states.  Edom,  which  must 
have  been  shorn  of  much  of  its  strength  through  its 
capitulation  to  the  Assyrians  (§  250)  about  800  B.C.,  was 
worsted  in  a  war  with  Judah,  which  steadily  aimed  to 
reduce  its  former  vassal,  and  to  realize  its  old  dream  of 


302  DECLINE  OF  DAMASCUS  BOOK  VI 

controlling  the  Red  Sea  traffic  and  the  caravan  trade  with 
Southern  Arabia.  A  step  in  the  latter  direction  was  now 
taken  by  the  capture  of  Petra  (2  K.  xiv.  7).  So  much  of 
freedom  and  expansion  was  vouchsafed  to  the  two  Hebrew 
monarchies  through  the  Assyrian  conquest  of  Damascus, 
of  which  the  sole  record  is  contained  in  the  long-buried 
annals  of  the  victorious  monarch!  Henceforward,  Syria 
never  became  a  controlling  power,  and  though  it  is  heard 
from  again,  it  appears  no  more  in  the  r61e  of  arbiter  or 
suzerain,  or  oppressor  of  the  neighbouring  states.  The 
fire  had  already  begun  to  burn  in  the  realm  of  Hazael,  and 
to  consume  the  palaces  of  Ben-hadad  (Am.  i.  4). 


CHAPTER   III 

EXPANSION   OF   ISRAEL   DURING  ASSYRIAN  INACTION 

§  255.  FOR  fifty  years  the  torpidity  and  impotence  of 
exhaustion  prevailed  in  the  kingdom  of  the  Tigris,  and 
this  again  was  as  important  in  its  consequences  as  it  was 
noteworthy  in  its  origin.  Let  us  take  a  glance  at  the 
condition  of  Assyria  during  the  half-century  of  its  quies- 
cence, and  then  we  can  examine  the  causes  of  this  his- 
torical phenomenon  and  estimate  its  indirect  but  weighty 
consequences. 

§  256.  For  the  information  which  we  possess  for  this 
period  we  are  indebted  to  the  scanty  notices  of  the  Eponym 
lists.  From  these  we  learn  that  the  successor  of  Ramman- 
niriiri  III  was  Shalmaneser,  the  third  of  that  name  (783- 
773),  and  that  while  his  military  activity  is  attested  by  an 
expedition  during  each  year  of  his  reign,  its  range  Avas 
greatly  decreased  as  compared  with  that  of  his  great 
predecessors.  The  principal  arena  of  his  activity  was 
Armenia,  the  growth  of  whose  power  threatened  not  only 
to  prevent  the  establishment  of  Assyrian  authority  in  that 
country  itself,  the  scene  of  many  Assyrian  victories  in 
former  days,  but  even  to  rob  the  hitherto  irresistible  kings 
of  Asslmr  of  intermediate  territory.  Both  of  these  dangers 
were,  in  fact,  realized.  The  six  expeditions  led  or  sent 
by  Shalmaneser  against  Armenia  were  the  last  that  went 
thither  from  Assyria  till  735  B.C.,  and  we  may  therefore 
conclude' that,  at  the  close,  all  hopes  of  conquering  the 
country  were  abandoned.  By  a  fortunate  coincidence,  we 
are  instructed  as  to  the  condition  of  affairs  by  Armenian 

303 


304  AEMEXIA   AND   ASSYRIA  BOOK  VI 

native  documents,  for  the  decipherment  and  translation  of 
which  we  are  indebted  to  the  genius  of  Professor  Sayce. 
From  them  it  appears  that  the  power  of  this  kingdom  of 
brave  mountaineers  had  been  consolidating  and  extending 
itself  during  most  of  the  eighth  century  B.C.,  that  it  had 
spread  far  to  the  west  of  Lake  Van,  and  actually  encroached 
upon  the  Assyrian  tributary  states  in  Northern  Syria. 
Argistis,  the  present  reigning  prince,  claims  that  the  gods 
had  presented  him  with  the  land  of  Asshur.  From  this 
we  are  not  to  conclude  that  Assyria  proper  was  actually 
invaded  and  occupied  by  this  doughty  patriot.  Synecdoche 
has  always  been  a  favourite  figure  with  the  annalists  of 
Oriental  conquests,  and  it  is  evident  that  we  must  here, 
just  as  often  elsewhere,  understand  a  part  for  the  whole. 
The  literal  fact  seems  to  be  that  the  Armenians  subdued 
all  the  territory  stretching  southward  between  Lakes  Van 
and  Urmia,  and  perhaps  even  crossed  the  border  of  Assyria 
proper.  The  state  thus  prosperously  established  was  built 
up  at  the  expense  of  Assyria,  whose  loss  of  prestige  was 
as  serious  as  its  loss  of  territory.  It  developed  and 
flourished  also  by  means  of  the  lessons  of  civilization 
which  it  had  learned  from  its  former  conquerors  and  now 
used  to  accomplish  their  overthrow. 

§  257.  These  disasters  to  the  Assyrian  arms  were 
apparently  not  redeemed  by  successes  in  other  directions. 
Inroads  on  his  southern  border,  from  bands  of  Armenians, 
Shalmaneser  attempted  to  repel,  but  they  went  on  as 
before.  An  expedition  to  the  region  of  Mount  Amanus 
("Cedar- land"),  and  another  to  Damascus,  the  latter 
occurring  in  the  last  }-ear  of  his  reign,  attest  a  wide- 
spread revolt  among  the  western  tributaries,  which  we 
judge,  from  subsequent  inactivity  on  the  part  of  the 
Assyrians,  to  have  been  entirely  successful.  The  move- 
ment in  Damascus,  made  by  a  community  so  thoroughly 
humbled  as  it  had  been,  bears  witness  to  the  growing 
impotence  of  the  once  invincible  Assyrians.  From  the 
fact  that  the  Assyrian  attempt  at  repression  was  made  after 


CH.  Ill,  §  259     LOSSES   AND    WEAKNESS   OF   ASSYRIA  305 


the  campaigns  in  Armenian  territory,  we  may  infer  that 
the  failure  of  the  latter  encouraged  a  wide-spread  revolt. 
We  may  also  conclude  that  the  expedition  was  directed 
against  all  the  states  of  Syria  and  Palestine  which  Ramman- 
niraii  had  subdued,  since  we  must  assume  that  the}-  also 
refused  to  continue  tribute  to  a  declining  suzerain.  This 
was  certainly  the  case  with  Israel,  which  had  begun  to 
enter  upon  the  career  of  expansion  and  conquest  inaugu- 
rated by  Jeroboam  II.  Beyond  these  general  conclusions 
we  have  as  yet  no  clSarer  light  thrown  upon  the  question 
of  international  relations  during  this  period. 

§  258.    The  reigns  of  the  two  following  kings  of  Assyria 
witnessed  a  still  further  slirmkmo-  of  the  national  resources 

o 

and  power.  Asshur-dan  (773-755)  and  Asshur-niraii 
(755-745)  passed  many  years  of  their  reigns  without 
going  forth  from  their  capital,  an  indication  of  quiescence 
and  inaction  which  betokened  the  sure  decay  of  the 
monarchy.  We  find  mention  made  of  an  expedition  to 
Media,  to  Namri,  against  the  Southern  Armenians,  and 
even  three  against  Hadrach 1  in  Syria ;  but  these  were  fol- 
lowed by  no  sign  of  success.  The  note  for  758  B.C., 
"peace  in  the  land,"  is  significant  as  a  token  that  the 
normal  inactivity  was  due,  not  to  the  tranquillity  of  pros- 
perity, but  to  the  powerlessness  of  the  realm  of  Assyria  to 
meet  in  the  field  its  revolted  colonies  and  the  predatory 
hordes  that  were  pressing  on  their  southern  border.  To 
these  causes  of  national  mourning  were  added  numerous 

O 

domestic  insurrections  and  outbreaks  of  pestilence.  Re- 
volt was  inaugurated  in  703  in  the  city  of  Asshur,  the 
ancient  capital,  and  was  not  suppressed  there  till  the 
following  year.  Thenceforward  insurrections  broke  out 
repeatedly  in  various  parts  of  the  diminished  empire. 
§  25!).  The  names  of  the  chief  seats  of  these  disturb- 


1  Assyr.  Halanka.  Cf.  Zccli.  ix.  1  ;  see  KGF.  p.  90  al,  Par.  279.  The 
expeditions  thither  took  place,  according  to  Cb  in  772,  705,  and  755.  It 
lav  somewhere  between  Hamath  and  Damascus,  nearer  the  former. 


30G  REVOLTS   AND   OTHER    DISASTERS  BOOK  VI 

ances  are  of  themselves  suggestive  of  the  deep-lying 
discontent  and  the  disregard  of  legitimate  and  prescriptive 
authority  in  political  and  commercial  centres,  now  mani- 
fested by  the  nobles  and  landholders ;  for  to  them  military 
enterprise  and  success  were  necessary  for  the  security  of 
their  possessions,  and  foreign  domination  for  their  enrich- 
ment through  plunder  and  tribute.  To  princes  and  people 
alike,  the  present  disasters  were  a  cause  of  humiliation 
and  mourning.  The  prosecution  of  public  works  and 
private  business  were  alike  retarded ;  the  beautifying  of 
the  capital  was  abandoned,  and  even  the  construction  and 
restoration  of  temples  had  to  be  foregone.  The  gods  thus 
slighted  seemed  then  to  declare  their  displeasure.  As  the 
far-darting  Phoebus  Apollo  avenged  with  pestilence  the 
outrage  committed  against  Chryses  his  priest,  so  the  Sun- 
god  withdrew  his  face  from  the  people  of  Asshur;  and 
there  came  such  dreaded  calamities  as  for  thousands  of 
years  the  priests  and  astrologers  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria 
had  associated  with  celestial  portents.  A  total  eclipse  of 
the  sun  in  the  month  Sivan  763  (§  265)  is  recorded  in 
connection  with  the  outbreak  in  the  city  of  Asshur;  and 
the  notices  for  765  and  759  end  with  the  statement  that 
there  was  "a  pestilence"  in  the  land.  So  when  a  final 
revolt  was  set  on  foot  in  the  capital  (746),  the  collapse  of 
the  whole  empire,  never  firmly  held  together  by  internal 
bonds,  seemed  inevitable,  under  the  pressure  of  military 
disasters  and  domestic  calamities,  unless  some  strong  hand 
should  intervene  and  save  the  state.  The  dynasty  that 
had  ruled  Assyria  for  twelve  centuries  or  more,  in  one 
branch  or  another  of  the  same  royal  family,  was  now 
exhausted  of  its  vitality  and  force.  The  times  were  ripe 
for  a  new  leader,  and  his  coming  was  not  long  delayed. 

§  260.  In  the  mean  time,  events  of  still  greater  import 
were  transpiring  in  Palestine,  to  which  it  will  now  be 
necessary  briefly  to  direct  attention.  The  fortunes  of 
Assyria  and  Israel  cease  to  be  interdependent  for  a  term 
of  years ;  but  we  shall  soon  see  the  divergent  lines  of 


CH.  Ill,  §  261  AMAZIAH   AND   JOASH  307 


historic  influence  converge  once  more,  with  results  which 
the  world  still  feels  in  every  throb  of  its  moral  and  spiritual 
life.  Our  survey  of  the  leading  events  in  the  history  of 
Israel  and  Judah  brought  us  to  the  beginning  of  the 
revival  of  prosperity,  rendered  possible,  as  we  observed, 
by  the  weakening  of  the  power  of  Syria.  The  impulse 
given  to  national  life  in  both  of  the  Hebrew  kingdoms 
was  of  long  continuance,  and,  especially  in  the  southern, 
of  very  remarkable  force.  The  development  of  Judah. 
after  its  conquest  of  Petra  in  Edom  (§  254),  was  retarded 
by  an  unhappy  conflict  with  Israel,  precipitated  by  the 
ambitious  folly  of  Amaziah,  who,  uplifted  by  his  victory 
over  the  Edoiuites,  sent  a  challenge  to  open  battle  to  Joash 
of  Israel  (c.  790).  This  act  of  enmity,  apparently  quite 
unprovoked,  was  probably  due  to  the  recollection  of  the 
murder  of  his  grandfather,  Ahaziah,  at  the  hands  of  Jehu, 
the  grandfather  of  Joash.  The  ruler  of  Samaria,  confident 
in  his  superior  power,  treated  the  message  with  ridicule, 
and  when  Amaziah  persisted  in  his  purpose  surprised  him 
within  his  own  borders  at  Beth-shemesh,  and  inflicted  upon 
him  a  crushing  defeat,  taking  him  prisoner  and  carrying 
him  to  his  own  capital.  Here  the  people,  overawed  by  the 
sudden  defeat  and  capture  of  their  king  and  commander, 
opened  the  gates  of  the  city  to  the  conqueror.  He,  spar- 
ing the  life  of  Amaziah,  contented  himself  with  the  rich 
plunder  of  the  Temple  and  the  king's  private  treasures,  and, 
after  taking  hostages,  returned  to  Samaria  (2  K.  xiv.  8-14). 
§  261.  We  do  not  read  here,  or  elsewhere,  of  Israel 
ever  having  reduced  the  sister  kingdom  to  the  condition 
of  vassalage,  though  now,  at  least,  the  very  best  opportu- 
nity of  doing  so  presented  itself.  This  fact,  as  contrasted 
with  the  relations  existing  between  other  neighbouring 
states  throughout  Western  Asia,  is  suggestive  of  the  deep 
underlying  sense  of  brotherhood  and  of  participation  in  a 
common  religious  inheritance,  which  was  never  quenched, 
eveii  in  times  of  armed  antagonism.  Amaziah,  who  lived 
fifteen  years  after  the  death  of  Joash  (2  K.  xiv.  17), 


308  SUCCESS   OF    ISRAEL   IX   WAR  BOOK  VI 

seems  to  have  met  with  further  ill-success  in  his  govern- 
ment, as  he  was  slain  in  a  mutiny  in  Jerusalem,  his 
youthful  son  Azariah  ("  Yah  we"  is  my  help ; "  in  Chronicles : 
Uzziah,  "Yahwe  is  my  strength")  being  placed  upon  the 
throne  by  the  choice  of  the  people. 

§  262.  During  these  events  the  northern  people  were 
flourishing  to  an  unexampled  degree.  The  victories  of 
Joash  over  Damascus  (§  252)  did  not  result  merely  in  the 
expulsion  of  the  Syrians  from  the  cities  of  Israel,  which 
they  had  seized  and  held  during  the  reign  of  Jehoahaz. 
How  far  the  reconquest  of  the  ancient  settlements  extended 
northward  we  do  not  know.  We  may,  however,  assume, 
at  least,  that  the  Syrians  were  compelled  to  yield  all  the 
country  west  of  the  Jordan.  But  much  greater  triumphs 
were  achieved  by  his  son  and  successor,  Jeroboam  II,  the 
greatest,  or,  at  least,  the  most  powerful,  of  the  kings  of 
Israel  (783-743).  The  narrative  of  the  Book  of  Kings 
states  only  in  the  broadest  way  the  results  of  his  military 
enterprises,  informing  us  that  he  restored  the  ancient 
border  of  Israel  from  the  entrance  to  Hamath  to  the  sea  of 
the  Arabah1  (2  K.  xiv.  25).  This,  however,  makes  plain 
to  us  that  Damascus  interposed  no  longer  any  obstacle  to 
the  progress  of  Jeroboam  indefinitely  northward,  and  that 
at  least  all  the  territory  claimed  by  the  first  Jeroboam  was 
reclaimed  once  more.  We  must  in  this  estimate  include 
the  old  possessions  to  the  east  of  the  Jordan,  probably 
Moab,  and  certainly  the  land  of  Gilead  in  its  widest 
extent,  where  Damascus  had  borne  sway  so  long  and  so 
cruelly.  The  country  towards  Hamath  was  probably  only 
ravaged  and  laid  under  contribution. 

§  263.  The  rapidity  and  thoroughness  with  which  this 
process  of  national  recuperation  was  effected,  in  the  com- 
paratively few  years  that  had  elapsed  since  the  death  of 
Jehoahaz,  in  the  opening  year  of  the  eighth  century  B.C., 
may  well  excite  our  admiration  and  wonder.  The  explana- 
tion, however,  has  already  been  largely  suggested.  The 

1  Cf.  Am.  vi.  14,  "to  the  wady  of  the  Arabah." 


CH.   Ill,  §  Mi          PROSPERITY   NOT    UNMIXED  809 

change  is  not  to  be  traced  to  the  vitality  of  the  race  alone, 
or  the  undeniable  prowess  and  energy  of  the  last  two 
representatives  of  the  house  of  Jehu.  It  was  also  due  to 
the  withdrawal  of  the  pressure  exerted  by  Damascus.  And 
the  fact  that  the  rehabilitation  was  now  so  easily  achieved 
shows,  as  nothing  else  can  do,  how  great  had  been  the 
force  that  had  dominated  the  politics  of  the  West-land, 
and  how  terrible  the  chastisement  had  been,  after  whose 
infliction  Damascus  lorded  it  no  more  among  the  nations. 
It  remains  to  be  added  that  Jeroboam  put  at  least  a 
temporary  check  to  the  ravages  of  the  neighbouring  peoples, 
which,  for  one  purpose  or  another,  invaded  the  borders  of 
Israel.  These  were,  besides  Syria,  especially  Phoenicia 
and  Ammon  and  Moab  (Am.  i.). 

§  264.  The  political  and  material  condition  of  Israel 
under  the  dynasty  of  Jehu,  which  is  but  scantily  indicated 
in  the  historical  narrative,  may  be  more  fully  learned  from 
the  writings  of  the  contemporary  prophet,  Amos,  who 
prophesied  about  the  middle  of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam. 
From  him  we  gather,  among  other  things,  that  the  success 
which  had  attended  the  warlike  enterprises  of  Israel  under 
Joash  and  Jeroboam  was  not  accompanied  by  unmixed 
prosperity.  The  first  of  the  Prophets,  though  he  lived  in 
Judah,  represented  in  great  measure  the  northern  kingdom 
also,  and  his  allusions  to  calamities  proceeding  from  natural 
causes  refer  to  the  whole  of  the  Mediterranean  coastland. 
He  gives  (ch.  iv.)  a  long  list  of  calamities,  as  fresh  in 
recollection,  just  at  the  time  when  the  country  was  freest 
from  political  troubles;  he  cites  (iv.  6  ff.)  drought  and 
destructive  insects,  with  famine,  and  adds  to  them  blight 
and  mildew,  pestilence,  and  an  earthquake.  His  reference 
to  the  death  of  multitudes  in  battle,  and  to  the  deprivation 
of  the  strongest  portion  of  the  national  defence,  the  use  of 
cavalry  (iv.  10;  cf.  v.  3),  are  reminiscences  of  the  clays  of 
Jehoahaz,  when  Israel  was  at  its  lowest.  He  mentions 
(i.  G,  9)  with  strong  feeling  an  occasion  of  great  loss, 
suffering,  and  humiliation  to  the  Hebrew  peoples,— 


310  DOMESTIC   CALAMITIES  BOOK  VI 

constant  border  raids  conducted  by  the  Philistians  and 
Tyrians,  for  the  special  purpose  of  the  slave-trade,  the 
captives  being  sold  to  traders  and  crimps  in  the  Edomitic 
port  on  the  Red  Sea.  These  incursions  could  hardly  have 
been  carried  on  with  impunity  during  the  reign  of  Jero- 
boam, and  we  therefore  conclude  that  they  form  part  of  the 
retrospect  of  Israel's  troubles,  which  make  up  the  back- 
ground of  the  picture  of  present  danger  and  coming  judg- 
ment drawn  by  Amos  with  such  vividness  and  power. 

§  265.  With  regard  to  the  calamities  in  the  sphere  of 
the  natural  world,  it  is  impossible  to  determine  accurately 
their  dates ;  but  we  may  be  sure  that  they  were  still  pressing 
hard  upon  the  contemporaries  of  Amos.  The  earthquake 
fell  within  the  reigns  of  Jeroboam  and  Azariah  (Zech. 
xiv.  5),  and  we  may  add  that  much  of  the  imagery  of  Amos 
seems  to  be  drawn  from  eclipses  of  the  sun  (iv.  13 ;  v.  8, 
18,  20),  one  of  which,  indeed,  appears  to  be  directly 
referred  to  in  viii.  9.  The  suggestion  that  this  is  the 
famous  Assyrian  eclipse  of  June  15,  763, 1  has  much  in 
its  favour,  and  this  supplies  us  not  only  with  the  approxi- 
mate date  of  the  commission  and  prophecy  of  Amos,  but 
also  recalls  to  us  the  fact  that  the  Assyrian  records,  meagre 
as  they  are  for  this  period,  yet  contain  several  notes  of 
wide-spread  calamities  (§  259).  At  least  the  pestilence  of 
765  may  be  cited  as  evidence  that  this  terrible  visitation 
came  upon  the  whole  country,  from  the  Mediterranean  to 
the  Tigris ;  and  one  is  perhaps  not  far  wrong  in  attributing 
it,  as  well  as  other  evils,  to  the  wars  that  had  been  raging 
so  constantly  throughout  the  whole  realm  of  the  North- 
Semitic  civilization. 

§  266.  These,  and  kindred  occasions  of  national  depres- 
sion and  unsettlement,  instruct  us  more  accurately  as  to 
the  real  state  of  popular  feeling  during  the  reign  of  Jero- 

1  Cf.  Note  5,  and  see  especially  KGF.  p.  338  ff.  Besides  this,  there 
had  been  the  total  eclipse  of  809,  and  another,  also  visible  in  Palestine, 
happened  Nov.  8,  771,  at  12.55  P.M.  (See  Stanley's  Jewish  Church,  1887, 
vol.  ii,  p.  311.) 


CH.  Ill,  §  207       MILITARISM  AND   CENTRALISM  311 

boam  than  a  mere  general  statement  as  to  his  successes  in 
war.  He  was,  no  doubt,  a  patriotic  and  strenuous  ruler, 
and  his  strong  hand  availed  to  keep  the  reclaimed  tribal 
possessions  of  Israel  in  some  sort  of  cohesion  until  his 
death.  The  central  power  was  maintained  by  an  energetic 
administration,  involving  a  strong  force  of  officials  in  the 
capital  and  in  the  chief  provincial  towns,  and,  above  all, 
the  maintenance  of  a  large  and  well-drilled  army.  Now  it 
became  at  length  a  question  whether  this  establishment 
could  be  kept  up;  whether  an  impoverished  and  much 
afflicted  people,  consisting  largely  of  small  landholders, 
in  districts  whose  attachment  to  Israel  was  intermittent 
and  subject  to  the  fortune  of  war,  would  continue  to  follow 
loyally  even  the  most  successful  and  powerful  of  their 
kings.  \Ve  may  gather,  I  think,  from  the  various  records, 
that  they  did  not.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  attitude 
of  the  pampered  nobles  and  parasites  of  the  court,  the 
people  at  large  were  discontented  and  unruly,  ready  to 
divide  themselves  into  factions,  which  would  support, 
respectively,  this  and  that  pretender,  whom  the  condition 
of  affairs  encouraged  to  aim  at  the  kingly  authority.  The 
times  demanded  both  a  genius  for  ruling  in  the  kings  of 
Israel,  and  also  the  perpetuation  of  a  powerful  dynasty. 
The  insecurity  of  a  throne,  which  had  been  already  often 
contested,  was  made  manifest  upon  the  death  of  its  most 
powerful  occupant,  and  the  house  of  Jehu  was  doomed. 

§  267.  The  history  of  the  northern  kingdom  after  the 
death  of  the  second  Jeroboam  affords  a  striking  parallel  to 
the  times  that  followed  the  reign  of  the  first  (§  211).  His 
son  Zachariah  reigned  only  six  months.  "Shallum  the 
son  of  Jabesh  conspired  against  him  and  smote  him  at 
Ibleam,1  and  put  him  to  death  and  reigned  in  his  stead" 
(2  K.  xv.  10).  But  the  usurper  enjoyed  his  authority  for 
even  a  briefer  period  than  his  victim.  Menahem,  in  all 

1  Sept.  Lucian  'le^Xaa/x  (cf.  Josh.  xvii.  11)  corrects  the  unintelligible 
CL'^-p,  of  which  Ewald  (followed  by  Stanley)  has  made  the  name  of  an 
additional  king  of  Israel. 


312  ACCESSION   OF   UZZIAH   IN   JUDA1I  BOOK  VI 

probability  one  of  the  generals  of  the  army,  marched 
against  him  from  his  post  at  Tirzah,  and  put  to  an  end  his 
ambitious  (and,  perhaps,  patriotic)  enterprises  by  a  sum- 
mary execution.  Receiving,  as  we  may  assume,  the  sup- 
port of  the  nobles,  he  maintained  himself  upon  the  throne 
against  the  opposing  elements  of  the  population  for  a  few 
years,  until,  being  hard  pressed,  he  followed  the  example 
of  a  previous  usurper  and  called  in  the  aid  of  the  now 
revived  power  of  Assyria.  This  crisis  will  need  a  special 
treatment,  and  we  shall  now  follow  for  a  moment  the 
course  of  the  history  of  the  southern  kingdom. 

§  268.  The  decline  of  the  kingdom  of  Damascus,  which 
had  furnished  the  opportunity  and  the  incentive  for  the 
revival  of  the  fortunes  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  gave  even 
a  stronger,  or,  at  least,  a  more  permanent,  impetus  to  the 
development  and  strengthening  of  Judah.  The  reign  of 
Uzziah  marks  the  point  at  which  that  kingdom  emerges 
from  its  obscurity  and  takes  an  equal  place  among  the 
leading  nations  of  Western  Asia.  The  duration  of  his  sole 
reign  \ve  cannot  with  any  certainty  determine,  but  its 
beginning  is  almost  coincident  with  that  of  his  northern 
compeer.  The  very  fact  that  political  good  fortune 
attended  both  kingdoms  alike,  is  perhaps  of  itself  an 
argument  in  favour  of  the  contemporaneousness  of  the 
reigns  of  the  two  successful  monarchs,  since  it  will  be 
observed  that,  after  the  time  of  embitterment  and  em- 
broilment which  followed  the  great  schism,  the  two  He- 
brew monarchies,  relatively  to  the  outside  world,  rose 
and  declined  together.  The  Book  of  Kings  has  little  to 
say  of  this  epoch  of  national  advancement;  but  conquests 
among  the  Philistines  and  Ammonites  are  attested  by 
incidental  evidence,  and  are  particularly  described  in  the 
Book  of  Chronicles1  (ch.  xxvi.).  The  political  genius  of 
Uzziah  is  illustrated  by  his  establishment  of  a  well-trained 
army,  consisting  of  a  national  militia,  in  addition  to  the 

1  The  credibility  of  the  statements  in  Chronicles  is  shown  in  an  article 
by  the  present  writer  in  the  Expositor,  November,  1890,  ' '  Uzziah  and 


On.  ITT,  §  269    HIS   STRONG  AND  PROSPEROUS   RULE  313 

body-guard,  which  had  been  in  existence  from  the  days  of 
David  and  had  had  a  predominance  dangerous  on  many 
occasions  to  the  public  peace  and  welfare,  in  both  Judah 
and  Israel.  The  existence  and  efficiency  of  such  an  army, 
combined  with  respect  for  dynastic  authority  in  the 
southern  kingdom,  accounts,  in  a  large  measure,  for  the 
perpetuation  of  that  monarchy  far  beyond  the  days  of 
t'zziah.  To  this  must  be  added  the  measures  taken  by 
Uzziah  for  the  strengthening  of  Jerusalem  (2  Chr.  xxvi.  9) 
on  the  sides  most  open  to  attack,  and  the  employment  of 
engines  of  defence  with  projectiles,  after  the  fashion 
represented  on  the  Assyrian  monuments  (v.  15).  In  other 
respects,  also,  he  seemed  to  follow  the  example  of  the  most 
notable  of  Assyrian  monarchs,  whose  paternal  care  for  the 
people  was  as  great  as  their  warlike  enterprise  and  valour ; 
the  digging  of  reservoirs,  the  cultivation  of  the  vine,  and 
the  breeding  and  improvement  of  cattle,  all  finding  in  him 
a  zealous  promoter  (v.  10). 

§  209.  Uzziah,  in  his  declining  years,  was  a  victim  to 
the  terrible  disease  of  leprosy,  and  was  thus  both  physi- 
cally and  legally  incapable  of  taking  an  open  part  in  public 
affairs.  His  son  Jotham  acted  as  regent  during  this  period, 
and  his  reign  of  sixteen  years  lasted  till  but  little  beyond 
the  death  of  his  father.  His  total  administration  may  be 
put  down  provisionally  as  having  extended  from  about 
750  to  735  B.C.,  and  the  death  of  Uzziah  took  place  later 
than  740  B.C.,  since  he  is  apparently  mentioned  in  an 
Assyrian  inscription  in  connection  with  an  event  which 
occurred  very  soon  after  that  date  (§  307).  We  may  put 
it  provisionally  at  738  B.C.,  so  that  the  single  reign  of 
Jotham  probably  lasted  not  more  than  two  or  three  years.1 

the  Philistines."  The  state  of  things  as  described  by  the  Chronicler 
explains  later  historical  conditions  otherwise  inexplicable,  e.g.,  Hezekiah's 
lordship  over  Ekron. 

1  We  have,  perhaps,  a  suggestion  of  its  length  in  2  Chr.  xxvii.  6. 
Here  it  is  said  that  the  Ammonites  rendered  tribute  "in  the  second  year 
and  in  the  third  "  ;  that  is,  apparently,  it  was  paid  till  the  accession  of  a 
new  king. 


314  MATERIAL  PROGRESS  UNDER  JOTHAM      BOOK  VI 

Its  duration  must  have  been  very  brief,  since  it  is  not 
marked  distinctively  in  the  contemporary  prophetic  writ- 
ings, as  those  of  Uzziah  and  Ahaz  are.  The  character  of 
his  rule  was  essentially  the  same  as  that  of  his  father. 
He  continued  the  same  vigorous  regime,  perhaps  under 
the  direction  of  Uzziah,  as  long  as  the  latter  lived.  It  is, 
at  any  rate,  remarkable  that  Uzziah  should  have  been 
regarded  by  foreigners  like  the  Assyrians  as  the  official 
ruler,  till  near  the  end  of  his  days.  This  fact  can  only 
be  explained  on  the  supposition  that  the  monarch  who  had 
given  to  his  country  a  position  of  Palestinian  supremacy 
retained,  even  in  retirement,  his  prestige  and  influence, 
till  he  was  humbled  by  the  power  of  Assyria  itself  (§  308), 
at  the  very  close  of  his  remarkable  career.  During  Jotham's 
regency  the  kingdom  continued  to  prosper.  Edom,  the 
hereditary  foe,  was  still  kept  under;  and  trade  and  com- 
merce, which  extended  in  various  directions  and  circu- 
lated many  articles  of  international  value,  received  its 
most  marked  impetus  from  the  Edomite  seaport  at  the  head 
of  the  Elamitic  Gulf  acquired  by  Uzziah  (2  K.  xiv.  22). 
The  people  became  more  curious  and  more  enterprising, 
and  acquired  a  relish  for  foreign  culture  and  secular  ideas. 
Even  a  taste  for  works  of  pictorial  art,  so  foreign  to  all  the. 
races  of  the  West-land,  began  to  be  cultivated  (Isa.  ii.  16). 
In  this  innovation,  as  in  other  matters  already  mentioned, 
we  may  discern  the  influence  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria, 
which  had  conquered  much  of  Western  Asia  by  their 
manners  long  before  they  had  permanently  subdued  it  by 
their  arms.  The  defences  of  the  country  were  increased 
and  strengthened,  especially  on  the  western  side,  and 
Jerusalem  was  more  strongly  fortified  against  impending 
days  of  siege.  The  Ammonites  brought  rich  tribute  for 
three  years ;  and  since  Ammon  was  only  accessible  if  Moab 
was  subdued  or  quiescent,  it  may  be  supposed  that  the 
latter  kingdom  withdrew  its  allegiance  to  Israel  after  the 
troubles  which  began  there  with  the  death  of  Jeroboam, 
and  submitted  to  Judah  without  serious  opposition.  If 


Cn.  Ill,  §  271     STABILITY   OF   THE   JUDAIC    STATE  315 

so,  we  have  here  an  explanation  of  a  part,  at  least  (Isa. 
xvi.  1  ff.),  of  the  obscure  prophecy  relating  to  Moab  which 
was  quoted  by  Isaiah  about  704  B.C.1 

§  270.  Jotham  died  while  still  young.  After  the 
Assyrian  complication  and  its  penalties  (§  307  f.),  the  last 
year  of  his  life  was  clouded  by  a  foreign  imbroglio  which 
was  to  result  in  most  important  consequences ;  namely,  a 
combination  between  Israel  and  Damascus  against  Judah. 

o 

This  movement,  as  novel  in  its  character  as  it  was 
momentous,  is  to  be  partly  explained  (see  §  316)  as  an 
attempt  to  curb  the  power  of  Judah,  which  was  still  greater 
than  that  of  either  of  the  allies.  The  responsibility  of 
dealing  with  it  was  transferred  by  the  death  of  Jotham  to 
his  son  Ahaz. 

§  271.  We  have  seen  how,  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel, 
the  prosperous  times  of  Jeroboam,  instead  of  promoting 
the  strength  and  permanence  of  the  state,  really  helped  to 
hasten  its  dissolution,  by  promoting  class  feeling  and 
sectional  divisions,  with  mutual  distrust,  popular  discon- 
tent, and,  as  a  consequence,  sedition,  revolts,  usurpations, 
and  civil  war.  The  contrast  afforded  by  the  solidarity  and 
governmental  stability  of  Judah  is  very  striking,  and  is, 
perhaps,  at  no  period  so  worthy  of  remark  as  at  the  acces- 
sion of  the  youthful  Ahaz.  We  see  that  in  Israel  the 
discordant  elements,  which  were  held  together  by  the 
strong  hand  of  Jeroboam,  began  to  strain  apart  in  his  later 
years,  and  broke  quite  asunder  at  once  after  his  death. 
But  in  Judah,  whatever  forces  were  at  work  tending 
towards  disintegration  were  checked  and  thwarted  by 
stronger  centripetal  tendencies.  Ahaz  was,  indeed,  not 
only  very  young,  but  also  weak,  timid,  irresolute,  and 
vacillating;  and  gross  evils,  akin  to  those  which  had 
marred  the  northern  kingdom,  had  already  taken  firm  root 

1  Sec  Ewalil,  History  of  Israel,  iv.  144,  note  (Engl.  tr.)-  The  words  of 
Isa.  xvi.  imply  that  the  subjection  of  Moab  to  Judah  was  either  existing 
or  impending,  and  no  other  period  than  the  time  of  Uzziah  and  Jotham 
suits  this  condition. 


316  TENDENCIES   TO    DECAY   IN  JUDAH  BOOK  VI 

in  his  dominions  also:  a  grasping  and  usurious  spirit 
among  capitalists ;  the  growth  of  a  class  of  large  land- 
holders, alien  to  the  spirit  of  Hebrew  institutions  and 
subversive  of  the  frugal  and  hardy  independence  of  the 
citizens;  oppression  of  the  poor;  corruption  and  dishonesty 
in  the  courts  of  justice;  irreligion  and  practical  skepti- 
cism among  leaders  of  opinion;  luxurious  and  profligate 
habits,  especially  intemperance  and  licentiousness,  among 
the  nobles  and  the  wealthy;  and,  last  but  not  least,  the 
spoiling  of  home  life  and  the  deterioration  of  the  old-time 
simplicity  and  purity  of  manners,  through  the  frivolity 
and  fashionable  self-display  of  the  women  of  the  capital. 
But,  in  spite  of  these  elements  of  decay  and  division,  most 
of  which  continued  to  exist  and  flourish  till  the  close  of 
Jewish  independence,  and  in  spite  of  foreign  complications 
more  serious  than  any  which  had  as  yet  threatened  the 
stability  of  the  Northern  Kingdom,  the  little  principality 
of  Judah  remained  a  monarchy  and  a  nation  for  a  century 
and  a  half  after  the  death  of  Uzziah.  An  inquiry  into  the 
causes  of  this  historical  phenomenon  will  help  us  to  under- 
stand not  only  the  internal  affairs  of  Judah,  but  also  its 
international  relations,  from  this  critical  period  onward. 

§  272.  A  mere  glance  at  the  map  of  Palestine,  as 
divided  between  the  two  Hebrew  kingdoms,  helps  to 
explain  these  outstanding  facts,  particularly  if  at  the  same 
time  we  call  to  mind  the  conditions  under  which  the  two 
kingdoms  were  founded  and  developed.  The  partition  of 
territory  between  the  two  nations  was  not  made  in  accord- 
ance with  the  plrysical  conditions  which  naturally  promote 
political  division.  To  be  sure,  a  large  part  of  the  popula- 
tion of  the  northern  kingdom  had  the  same  pursuits  and 
interests  as  the  people  of  Judah,  and,  if  tribal  antecedents 
had  not  intervened,  would  naturally  have  coalesced  with 
them  into  a  compact  and  powerful  homogeneous  organic 
whole.  In  that  part  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  from  its 
southern  boundary  northward  to  the  edge  of  the  plain  of 
Jezreel,  the  people  were,  from  the  nature  of  the  soil  which 


Cn.  Ill,  §  273     LACK  OF   UNITY  IN  NORTH   ISLiAEL  317 

they  occupied,  simple  husbandmen,  vine-dressers,  and 
shepherds,  while  the  southern  kingdom,  from  Jericho  to 
the  beginning  of  the  maritime  lowlands,  was  wholly 
affected  by  the  same  important  outward  conditions,  and  of 
large  towns,  that  would  naturally  break  this  continuity, 
there  were  few  besides  Jerusalem.  The  northern  kingdom 
was  divided  into  four  main  sections.  There  was  first  the 
country  about  Samaria,  already  characterized.  Then  came 
the  spacious  valley  and  plain  of  Jezreel,  with  its  large 
wheat  plains  and  its  rich  estates,  its  flourishing  trading 
towns  and  its  rural  aristocracy.  North  of  that,  again,  lay 
the  territory  claimed  by  Asher,  Zebulon,  and  Naphtali,  but 
only  partially  preempted  by  them,  and  so  much  taken  up 
by  the  unsubdued  race  of  Canaanites,  and  later  by  alien 
immigrants  from  east  and  west  and  north,  as  to  be  desig- 
nated in  the  time  of  Uzziah  and  Ahaz  "the  district  (circle) 
of  the  Gentiles  "  (Isa.  viii.  23 ;  cf.  1  K.  ix.  11 ;  2  K.  xv. 
20),  the  whole  forming  a  heterogeneous  community  of 
traders,  fishermen,  and  agriculturists.  Lastly,  east  of  the 
Jordan  were  the  great  grazing  and  spice-bearing  districts, 
which  went  by  the  general  names  of  Gilead  and  Bashan. 
The  history  of  each  of  these  divisions  has  already  been 
given,  from  the  point  of  view  of  their  relations  to  the 
central  government;  and  it  has  been  made  abundantly  clear 
how  loose  the  bonds  of  attachment  were  from  the  very 
beginning  of  the  separate  monarchy.  The  story  from  end 
to  end,  as  contrasted  with  the  fortunes  of  the  smaller  but 
unitary  Judtean  kingdom,  illustrates  most  strikingly  to 
how  great  an  extent  geographical  and  physical  conditions 
determine  the  bent  and  tendencies  of  isolated  and  de- 
pendent communities  ;  and  it  also  shows  how  the  cohesive- 
ness  of  a  nation  which  lacks  the  capacity  and  endowment  of 
local  self-government,  is  derived  mainly  from  the  common 
impulses  that  are  awakened  by  similarity  of  occupation 
and  of  every-day  experience  on  the  part  of  the  constituent 
elements  of  its  population. 

§  273.    Our  present  stage  of  progress  in  this  history  also 


318  SURROUNDINGS   OF  THE   TWO   KINGDOMS    BOOK  VI 

enables  us  to  look  forward  and  backward  upon  the  inter- 
national relations  of  the  two  kingdoms  respectively,  and 
to  appreciate  the  advantages  possessed  by  the  smaller 
country  as  to  chances  of  survival  among  the  feuds  and 
complications  that  made  up  the  framework  of  national 
life  and  action  in  ancient  AVestern  Asia.  Here,  again, 
geographical  conditions  were  most  favourable  to  Judah  and 
unfavourable  to  the  Northern  Kingdom.  The  former  was 
separated  on  the  east  from  the  naturally  hostile  countries 
of  Moab  and  Ammon  1  by  the  Dead  Sea  and  the  Arabah,  so 
that  trouble  rarely  came  from  that  quarter  (§  215)  ;  while, 
on  the  west,  the  Philistian  cities,  which  were  less  capable 
of  unification  and  organization  than  any  communities  of  the 
Hebraic  race,  were  unable  to  do  them  serious  harm,  by 
reason  of  their  ever-increasing  tendency  to  isolated  action, 
and  their  consequent  decreasing  influence.  On  the  north, 
Samaria  acted  normally  as  a  barrier  against  the  Syrians, 
who  only  once  (§  243)  injured  Judah  by  a  successful 
invasion.  It  was  from  the  south  that  danger  was  to  be 
chiefly  dreaded,  and  that  from  Edom,  which  was  a  real 
source  of  trouble,  though  usually  kept  in  subjection,  or  at 
least  restricted  to  secondary  operations  of  guerilla  and 
border  warfare.  Egypt,  partly  on  account  of  domestic 
preoccupation,  and  partly  because  of  lack  of  national 
energy,  pretermitted  during  the  earlier  years  of  the  Judtean 
monarchy  its  ancient  rSle  of  Asiatic  invader,  and  in  the 
latter  times  was  more  to  be  dreaded  as  an  intriguing  and 
faithless  ally  than  as  an  active  enemy.  For  the  rest,  the 
desert  tribes  that  continually  encroached  on  the  Negeb 

1  The  prophecies  against  Moab  in  Isa.  xv.,  xvi.,  have,  as  their  chief 
occasion,  the  relations  between  that  country  and  the  Northern  Kingdom. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  Jer.  xlviii.  (see  especially  v.  27),  though  cer- 
tain expressions  in  that  chapter,  including  adaptations  there  made  from 
older  prophecies  recorded  in  Isaiah,  and  the  similar  utterances  in  Zeph. 
ii.  8  fi.,  refer  to  the  conduct  of  Moab  towards  Judah  in  the  declining 
period  of  the  latter.  Ammon  is  regarded  by  Prophecy  from  the  same 
historical  standpoint  as  Moab ;  see  the  same  passage  in  Zephaniah  and 
Jer.  xlix.  1-5. 


Cii.  Ill,  §  275        NATURAL   UNITY   OF   JUDAH  319 

were,  in  some  respects,  of  actual  benefit  to  the  Jewish 
nation;  they  furnished  recruits  both  to  the  working  popu- 
lation and  to  the  militia,  and  when  the  more  formidable 
of  their  tribes  were  subdued  they  rendered  service  as 
vassals  in  the  defence  of  their  suzerain. 

§  274.  How  differently  situated  in  this  respect  the 
northern  kingdom  \vas,  we  have  had  already  ample  occasion 
to  note,  and  shall  soon  see  proved  more  abundantly.  East 
of  Jordan,  "Damascus  threshed  Gilead  with  threshing 
instruments  of  iron  "  (Am.  i.  3),  and  Moab  requited  itself 
for  its  hard  service  to  Israel  by  plundering  and  curtailing 
the  most  exposed  portions  of  its  ancient  tribal  possessions,1 
while  Ammon  also  bore  a  hand  in  similar  enterprises  (Jer. 
xlix.  1).  The  most  of  "Galilee"  fell  a  prey  to  Syria  in 
the  reign  of  the  third  king  of  Israel,  and  was  never 
permanently  recovered.  The  plain  of  Jezreel,  which,  by 
reason  of  its  being  the  great  caravan  route,  was  at  best 
only  half  Israelitish,  became  the  frequent  camping-ground 
cf  the  Syrian,  and,  later,  of  the  Assyrian  armies,  which  it 
almost  seemed  to  be  perpetually  inviting  through  its  open 
passes,  its  well-trodden  roads,  and  its  unprotected  wealth. 

§  275.  Another  element  of  permanence  and  solidity 
possessed  by  the  Southern  Kingdom  was  the  fact  that  it 
consisted  virtually  of  one  tribe;  at  least,  the  tribal  differ- 
ences between  Judah  and  Benjamin,  which  once  had  been 
so  strong,  were  forgotten  as  the  people  of  both  tribes 
became  merged  in  the  one  current  of  life  and  action  which 
ebbed  and  flowed  about  the  common  centre,  the  great  city 
and  fortress  once  claimed  by  Benjamin.  The  contrast 
witli  the  Northern  Kingdom,  which  might  be  illustrated 
indefinitely,  is  strikingly  suggested  by  the  perpetuation, 
not  of  the  names  of  each  of  "the  ten  tribes,"  for  these  had, 
for  the  most  part,  lost  their  separate  identity  (§  200),  but 
of  representative  designations  of  the  several  above-named 
sections:  Ephraim,  Manasseh,  Naphtali,  and  Gilead. 
Ephraim,  the  predominant  section,  never  really  came  into 

i  Inscription  of  Mesha,  1.  10  ff.  (cf.  §  236). 


320  PREDOMINANCE   OF   JERUSALEM  BOOK  VI 

•   • 

vogue  as  a  designation  for  the  whole,  in  the  same  way  as 
did  Judah  in  the  southern  kingdom ;  for  it  never  included 
the  country  east  of  Jordan,  and  besides  appears  to  have 
been  used  in  this  broad  sense  only  in  the  times  when 
Samaria  and  the  surrounding  territory  comprised  the  whole 
of  what  remained  of  the  kingdom  founded  by  Jeroboam  I.1 
§  276.  A  fourth  distinction  between  the  two  kingdoms 
lay  in  the  greater  relative  importance  of  Jerusalem,  as  con- 
trasted with  the  northern  capital.  Samaria  was  not  the 
original  royal  residence.  It  could  not  compete  in  tradi- 
tional sanctity  or  ancient  fame  with  several  other  centres 
within  the  bounds  of  the  revolted  tribes.  It  was  not  even 
a  city  till  the  founder  of  the  third  dynasty  purchased  the 
hill  on  which  it  was  built  and  made  it  his  stronghold. 
But  even  as  a  fortress  Jerusalem  had  been  famous  any 
time  within  the  previous  fifteen  hundred  years  (Gen.  xiv. ; 
§  152)  ;  and  to  its  immemorial  renown  was  added  the  pres- 
tige of  the  throne  of  David  and  Solomon  as  rulers  over  a 
united  Israel,  the  glory  of  the  Temple  with  the  Ark  and 
the  Shechina,  the  original  ritual,  the  unbroken  round  of 
sacrifice  in  the  undisputed  seat  of  the  God  of  the  Covenant. 
For  these  and  other  reasons,  plain  to  attentive  readers, 
Jerusalem  became  ever  more  and  more  the  dominant 
portion  of  the  nation,  furnishing  a  stimulus  to  the  loyalty 
and  pride  of  the  people,  and  the  foundation  of  inextin- 
guishable patriotic  hope.  Thus  it  came  to  pass  that,  by  a 
process  of  historical  development  exceptional  in  the  ancient 
Orient,  there  were  established  in  Judah  the  political  con- 

1  Observe  the  gloss  "Ephraim"  for  "Israel"  in  2  Chr.  xxv.  7,  and 
the  alternation  of  the  names  in  Hos.  iv.  16,  17  ;  v.  3  (twice)  ;  v.  9  ; 
vi.  10  ;  xi.  8  ;  xiii.  1.  "Ephraim"  is  never  used  as  the  equivalent  of 
"Israel"  in  Kings,  but  frequently  so  in  Chronicles.  "Israel"  is  the 
only  term  employed  by  Amos  (note,  however,  "  Joseph,"  in  v.  15  ;  vi.  6)  ; 
but  "Ephraim"  is  employed  by  Hosea  more  often  than  "Israel,"  and  it 
is  quite  common  in  Isaiah.  This  indicates  the  effect  of  the  collapse  of 
the  kingdom  after  the  death  of  Jeroboam  II,  and  its  shrinkage  into  the 
historical  kernel  of  the  nation  which  contained  the  capital,  the  most 
defensible  and  long-lived  portion  of  the  "Kingdom  of  the  Ten  Tribes." 


CH.   Ill,  §  278         KING   AND   PEOPLE    IN  JUDAH  321 

ditions  which,  in  those  regions  and  in  those  times,  always 
secured  the  greatest  national  strength  and  perpetuity, —  a 
powerful  and  well-defended  city,  surrounded  by  an  indus- 
trious and  contented  dependent  village  and  country  popu- 
lation. How  this  became  possible  in  the  case  of  Jerusalem 
and  Judah,  and  yet  in  a  way  out  of  correspondence  with 
the  history  of  other  Oriental  cities  and  states,  is  now 
becoming  apparent. 

§  277.  The  permanence  of  the  Judaic  monarchy  was 
also  furthered  by  the  good  relations  maintained  between 
the  king  and  his  court  and  the  common  people  of  the  city 
and  country.  Organized  discontent  did  not  easily  manifest 
itself  among  the  simple  husbandmen  and  cattle-tenders 
outside  of  Jerusalem.  While  it  was  thus  no  difficult 
problem  to  maintain  the  royal  authority  among  this  por- 
tion of  the  population,  the  popular  leaders,  such  as  the 
Prophets,  who  arose  here  and  there  among  them,  were  the 
most  loyal  of  all  the  people  to  the  house  of  David.  In 
Jerusalem  itself,  the  Temple  with  its  priestly  and  other 
attendants,  the  court  and  the  magistracy  with  their  train 
of  officers,  formed  such  a  large  class,  that  this  aristocratic 
element  and  its  clientele  easily  controlled  the  body  of  the 
citizens.  Again,  the  bearing  and  disposition  of  the  kings 
towards  their  subjects  were,  as  a  rule,  easy  and  generous; 
and  it  will  not  be  forgotten  that  it  is  the  literature  of  the 
kingdom  of  Judah  that  has  given  to  the  world  the  best 
notions  of  what  constitutes  an  ideal  ruler. 

§  "278.  Thus  it  happened  that  while  the  Northern  King- 
dom, during  its  two  centuries  of  separate  existence,  was 
ruled  by  several  dynasties,  and  its  list  of  kings  includes 
nine  usurpers,  there  was  but  one  short  break  in  the  succes- 
sion of  the  family  of  David.  Even  in  the  period  of 
final  trouble,  under  the  Chaldreans,  these  despoilers  of 
kingdoms  did  not  go  outside  the  legitimate  line  in  choos- 
ing the  new  rulers  whom  they  imposed  upon  the  people. 
There  was  but  one  revolution,  and  that  resulted  in  the 
dethronement  of  the  only  usurper  known  to  the  Judaic 


322  A   SINGLE   DYNASTY  IN  JUDAH  BOOK  VI 

annals,  and  she  the  mother  of  the  legitimate  king,  who 
was  then  enthroned  in  her  place.  It  was  much  that  the 
constitution  of  the  little  kingdom  withstood  the  stress  of 
the  times  of  trial  already  passed  under  review.  But  that, 
upon  the  larger  sea  of  Asiatic  politics,  it  endured  so  long, 
without  internal  rupture  or  wreck,  the  strain  of  Assyrian 
invasions  and  Egyptian  intrigue,  is  a  phenomenon  unique 
in  Oriental  history.  It  seems  only  to  be  accounted  by  a 
special  Providence,  which  secured  through  such  stability 
of  institutions  and  manners  the  fulfilment  of  a  larger 
promise  and  a  more  blessed  hope  than  were  involved  in 
the  fortunes  of  any  single  people  or  nation. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  NEW  ASSYRIAN   POLICY  AND   HEBREW   PROPHECY 

§  279.  THE  middle  of  the  eighth  century  B.C.,  as  we 
have  seen  (§  257  f.),  found  the  Assyrian  empire  almost 
reduced  to  its  original  limits,  and  struggling  rather  for 
existence  than  for  supremacy  over  the  nations.  The  loss 
of  territory,  of  wealth,  and  of  prestige,  the  decline  in  trade 
and  commerce,  the  revolts  and  dissensions  within  the 
capital  itself,  the  threatened  incursions  from  border  tribes, 
all  pointed  to  the  necessity  of  a  change  of  rulers,  which 
should  result  in  restoring  its  accustomed  power  and  splen- 
dour to  the  realm  of  Asshur.  The  man  who  responded  to 
the  demand,  Tiglathpileser  III,  was  one  who  did  a  great 
deal  more  than  merely  restore  the  old  order  of  things. 
His  administration  of  eighteen  years  (745-727)  began  a 
new  era,  not  merely  in  the  history  of  Assyria,  but  also  in 
the  history  of  the  world.  Several  of  his  predecessors  had 
made  conquests  equal  or  nearly  equal  to  his ;  but  he  was 
the  first  who  knew  how  to  retain  the  possessions  thus 
acquired.  He  was  the  first,  indeed,  who  anywhere  ruled 
over  an  empire  in  the  true  sense  of  this  term.  Before  him, 
the  territory  claimed  by  the  rulers  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria 
were  held,  for  the  most  part,  on  a  very  precarious  tenure. 
The  new  king  introduced  new  ideas  of  organization  and 
administration;  and  these  principles,  steadily  acted  upon 
by  himself  and  his  successors,  finally  resulted  in  the 
establishment  of  a  comparatively  settled  government 
throughout  the  North-Semitic  world. 

§  280.    This  epoch-making  ruler,  whose  given  name  was 


324  TIGLATHPILESER   III  BOOK  VI 

Pulu,  styled  himself  officially  Tiglathpileser,  probably  in 
emulation  of  the  great  Tiglathpileser  I  (§  179  ff.).  He  was 
the  third  of  that  name  to  rule  in  Assyria  (cf.  §  216).  His 
original  name  seems  to  have  been  that  by  which  he  was 
best  known  to  the  populace  and  to  his  Babylonian  and 
Palestinian  contemporaries.  But,  naturally,  his  self-chosen 
cognomen  is  the  only  designation  that  finds  a  place  in  the 
official  documents  of  Assyria.  Berossus  refers  to  him  as 
"Phulus  rex  Chaldseorum,"  and  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy 
names  Poros  (apparently  the  same  word  modified  by  later 
Persian  influence)  as  one  of  the  contemporary  kings  of 
Babylon.  In  the  Hebrew  records  both  names  occur:  Pul 
in  2  K.  xv.  19  (twice),  and  Tiglathpileser  in  2  K.  xv.  29 
and  xvi.  7,  10,  1  Chr.  v.  6,  and  2  Chr.  xxviii.  20,  and  both 
together  in  1  Chr.  v.  26.  The  Babylonian  cuneiform  official 
documents  also  give  both  forms ;  that  is  to  say,  the  list  of 
Kings  gives  Pulu,  and  the  Chronicle,  Tiglathpileser.1 

§  281.  It  is  impossible  as  yet  to  tell  under  what  cir- 
cumstances this  great  ruler  came  to  the  throne.  Whether 
the  revolt  of  746,  already  mentioned  (§  258  f.),  was  ended 
by  the  death  of  Asshur-nirari,  or  whether  he  died  a  natural 
death,  does  not  appear.  According  to  the  statement  for 
745  of  the  Eponym  lists,  "  Tiglathpileser  took  his  seat  on 
the  throne  in  the  month  Ayru,  on  the  thirteenth  day." 
This  corresponds  to  the  beginning  of  Ma}%  745.  The 
report  of  the  preceding  year  would  extend  from  March- 
April,  746,  to  March-April,  745,  and  the  revolt  therein 
referred  to  might  have  therefore  taken  place  very  shortly 
before  the  accession  of  the  new  king.2  The  coincidence  is 
close  enough  to  justify  at  least  a  suspicion  that  the  insur- 
rection terminated  fatally  for  his  predecessor.  He  may 
perhaps  have  belonged  to  some  branch  of  the  royal  family, 
though  the  fact  that  his  parentage  or  ancestry  is  never 
mentioned3  makes  it  improbable  that  he  was  the  nearest 

1  See  Note  8  in  Appendix.  2  Cf.  Hommel,  GBA.  p.  648. 

3  This  was  also  the  case  with  Sinacherib  (see  Tiele,  BAG.  p.  226)  ; 
and  the  reason  why  he  is  silent  is  probably  because  his  father,  Sargon, 


On.  IV,  §  2>2       HIS   ANTECEDENTS   AND   ALMS  325 

heir  of  the  late  king.  The  supposition  that  has  the  most 
likelihood  is  that  he  was  a  general  of  the  army,  who,  at 
one  stage  or  another  of  the  revolution,  came  to  be  leader  of 
the  victorious  forces,  and  at  its  close  was  chosen  to  repair 
the  shattered  fortunes  of  the  empire.  There  is  no  suffi- 
cient ground  for  the  belief  that  he  was  a  Babylonian  by 
birth,  as  has  sometimes  been  assumed.  From  the  fact  that 
lie  retired  from  active  personal  service  in  the  field  some 
little  time  before  his  death,  we  may  infer  that,  as  in  the 
case  of  Shalmaneser  II,  he  was  at  that  stage  of  his  career 
well  advanced  in  life.  Since  he  reigned  but  eighteen 
years,  he  was  probably  at  least  of  middle  age  at  his  acces- 
sion. In  any  case,  his  achievements  show  that,  as  a  man 
of  experience,  he  had  given  much  careful  thought  to  the 
subject  of  the  condition  of  the  Assyrian  empire  and  the 
surest  means  of  making  his  sway  not  only  wide  but 
permanent.1 

§  282.  The  reader  will  bear  in  mind  the  practical  ends 
that  were  steadily  kept  in  view  by  the  rulers  of  the  empire 
of  the  Tigris,  ever  since  the  time  when  Asshurnasirpal 
took  up  again  the  imperial  idea  of  which  the  great  name- 
sake of  the  present  king  in  the  twelfth  century  was  the 
chief  ancient  exponent  (§  179,  217).  The  aim  was,  in 
brief,  to  make  all  lands  tributary  to  Asshur,  to  administer 
directly  the  affairs  of  each  district  or  tribe  where  that  was 

bavin;:  been  out  of  the  kingly  line,  he  had  no  pedigree  "to  brag  of." 
The  case  would  then  be  an  illustration  of  that  of  Tiglathpileser. 

1  Tiglathpileser's  inscriptions  are  numerous  ;  but  they  have  come  to  us 
in  a  very  imperfect  state.  They  were  of  two  main  classes :  those  which 
summarize  his  deeds  in  comprehensive  statements  according  to  the 
localities  or  aims  of  his  activity,  and  his  Annals,  which  describe  his 
achievements  in  detail  and  in  chronological  order.  Of  the  former  class 
the  most  important  are  Lay.  17  and  18,  and  II  R.  67.  The  latter  have  been 
published  mostly  in  a  fragmentary  form  in  several  plates  of  Layard,  and 
in  III  R.  9  and  10.  For  Smith's  efforts  to  secure  all  surviving  records 
in  Nimrud,  see  AD.  p'.  73  f.,  and  p.  253-287  for  criticism  and  transla- 
tions. Schrader,  Tiele,  and  Hommel  have  all  done  good  work  in  sifting 
and  adjusting,  and  now  we  have  a  complete  edition  of  the  remains  with 
transcription  and  translation  by  P.  Rost,  1893. 


326  STATE   OF   THE   ASSYRIAN   EMPIRE  BOOK  VI 

feasible ;  but,  in  any  case,  to  secure  regular  contributions 
of  the  richest  resources  of  the  nations,  with  the  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  sovereignty  and  supremacy  of  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  gods  of  Assyria.  It  will  be  remembered 
how  each  of  the  great  conquerors  had  reached  beyond  his 
predecessors,  especially  in  the  line  of  advance  that  led  to 
the  trading-marts  of  Arabia  and  the  Mediterranean,  till 
Ramman-nirari  III  had  gained  a  footing  in  Palestine, 
and,  in  addition,  had  secured  the  acquiescence  of  Babylon 
in  his  domination  of  Chaldaea,  and  the  consequent  com- 
mand of  the  Persian  Gulf.  But  these  long  campaigns  and 
persistent  exertions  had  at  last  ended  in  disappointment 
and  disgrace ;  Asshur  was  put  to  shame  before  the  lesser 
gods,  and  his  people  were  made  as  poor  as  many  of  those 
whom  they  had  robbed  and  spoiled  so  long  at  will.  It  was 
at  length  made  plain  that  the  greatest  efforts  and  achieve- 
ments were  followed  by  the  greatest  losses  and  the  deepest 
humiliation;  that,  just  in  proportion  to  the  outlay  of 
human  and  material  resources  in  foreign  conquest,  and  the 
consequent  temporary  success  of  the  Assyrian  arms,  was 
the  degree  of  exhaustion  and  impotence  that  followed. 
The  truth  .was,  that  the  task  of  subduing  the  nations  was 
a  less  formidable  undertaking  than  the  business  of  keeping 
them  in  subjection;  and  the  uprising  of  the  outraged 
tribes  and  cities,  as  soon  as  the  invading  hosts  had  left  the 
land,  and  the  wounds  of  the  "weapons  of  Asshur"  had 
healed,  made  too  great  a  demand  upon  the  military 
resources  of  the  "kings  of  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth." 
After  Asshurnasirpal  and  Shalmaneser  II,  there  had  come 
a  time  of  crippling  and  shrinking;  and  the  overgrown 
nmss  of  territory  acquired  under  Ramman-nirari  III  had 
dwindled  into  the  mangled  and  quivering  body-politic  of 
which  Tiglathpileser  was  now  to  assume  the  care,  and 
which  he  undertook  to  restore  to  life  and  power. 

§  283.  The  new  monarch  perceived  that,  to  carry  out 
the  old  plan  of  subjugation  and  administration,  would 
require  not  merely  an  army  continually  on  the  march  from 


CH.  IV,  §  283     PLANS   FOR   MOKE    SURE   CONTROL  327 

one  insurgent  district  to  another,  but  as  many  armies  .of 
occupation  as  he  had,  or  expected  to  have,  administrative 
districts.  But  even  this  would  not  provide  a  satisfactory 
government,  since  a  regime  of  martial  law  would  fail  to 
develop  the  resources  of  the  countries  from  which  he  hoped 
to  draw  his  riches.  Nor  would  it  be  possible  to  attempt 
this  system  on  a  large  scale,  since  the  loyal  subjects  of  the 
empire  could  not  furnish  sufficient  troops  necessary  for  the 
doubtful  experiment.  How,  then,  was  the  scheme  of  world- 
wide empire  to  be  realized?  For  realized  it  must  be, 
according  to  the  purpose  of  the  great  gods  of  Assyria,  who 
had  called  him  to  be  king.  The  solution  of  the  problem 
is  not  to  be  gathered  from  any  direct  statement  of  the 
Assyrian  annals,  since  these  are  always  drawn  up  in  the 
same  stereotyped  fashion,  with  the  same  rigid  and  exclu- 
sive adherence  to  the  salient  facts  of  battles  and  spoliation. 
We  are  rather  to  infer  it  from  the  general  indications 
afforded  by  the  records  in  this  later  period,  as  contrasted 
with  the  time  before  Tiglathpileser.  The  chief  device  was 
to  secure  a  tractable  population  in  the  more  troublesome 
unsubmissive  districts,  by  substituting  other  inhabitants 
for  those  who  persistently  refused  to  acquiesce  in  the  rule 
of  the  oppressor,  and  who  were  themselves  dragged  away 
to  a  remote  portion  of  the  empire,  usually  not  very  far  from 
the  capital.  At  the  same  time  that  this  drastic  measure 
was  coming  into  application,  a  more  thorough  organiza- 
tion of  the  provinces  and  vassal  states  was  gradually  being 
made,  civil  administration  being  more  and  more  substituted 
for  military  control,  so  that  an  assimilation  to  the  old  home 
provinces  was  being  effected,  step  by  step.  The  matter  of 
organizing  and  controlling  the  outlying  districts  pre- 
sented special  difficulty,  for  several  reasons  more  or  less 
obvious.  The  peoples  to  be  ruled  were  diverse  in  race 
and  habits,  in  previous  forms  of  government,  and  in  modes 
of  worship ;  but  it  may  be  presumed  that,  in  many  cases,  a 
still  greater  obstacle  was  afforded  in  the  extent  of  terri- 
tory which  was  to  be  taken  as  the  administrative  unit.  If 


328  OBSTACLES  TO  ASSIMILATION  BOOK  VI 

we  revert  for  a  moment  to  the  opening  chapter,  where  it 
was  shown  how  the  typical  Semitic  community  grew  up, 
it  will  be  remembered  that  each  city,  with  its  local  deity 
and  his  representative,  the  petty  king,  formed  the  basis  of 
each  primitive  state  (§  36  f.).  Now  when,  in  Babylonia 
and  Assyria,  one  city  came  to  dominate  the  rest,  the  latter 
were  not  merged  completely  into  the  former  so  that  their 
affairs  were  administered  directly  from  the  ruling  city, 
but  each  of  them  remained  a  sort  of  municipality  by  itself. 
It  did  not,  as  a  rule,  part  with  its  own  deity  or  cult,  but 
it  owned  the  supremacy  of  the  god  of  the  conquerors,  and 
for  that  reason  forfeited  its  own  king,  receiving  in  his 
place  a  municipal  governor  or  magistrate  (lalat^).  So,  as 
the  kingdom  of  Assyria  proper  developed,  there  were  as 
many  governmental  units  within  its  limits  as  there  were 
principal  cities  originally.  So,  also,  when  the  royal  resi- 
dence was  removed,  as  from  Asshur  to  Kalach,  and  from 
Kalach  to  Nineveh  proper,  each  of  these  places  still  had  its 
own  chief  magistrate;  and  we  have  seen  already  how  a 
revolt  could  spring  up  in  any  one  of  these  apart  from  the 
others  (§  258). 

§  284.  Now  when  it  came  to  organizing  a  newly  con- 
quered district,  though  there  might  be  no  theoretical 
difficulty  about  adjusting  its  relations  to  the  central 
power,  practically  the  conquerors  were  continually  coming 
to  face  problems  for  which  their  previous  small  experi- 
ments in  state-building  offered  them  no  ready-made  solu- 
tion. Particularly  was  this  the  case  with  communities 
such  as  those  of  Armenia,  Kommagene,  groups  of  Aramaeans 
both  east  and  west  of  the  River,  the  Hettite  tribes  of 
Eastern  Cilicia  and  Northern  Syria,  and  the  unique  Hebraic 
monarchies,  which  were  accustomed  more  or  less  frequently 
to  act  as  a  unit  in  offence  and  defence.  Each  of  these 
combinations  obviously  needed  to  be  controlled  by  one 
central  authority;  and  how  to  effect  this  was  the  question 
long  found  too  difficult  to  answer,  so  difficult  that  the 
attempt  had  several  times  brought  the  realm  of  Asshur  to 


CH.  IV,  §  286    RELATIONS  OF  SUBJECT   STATES  329 

the  verge  of  dissolution.  These  were  the  days  of  the  first 
essays  at  nation-making;  no  general  assimilating  process 
had  been  applied  or  devised  by  the  Semitic  peoples  of 
Western  Asia ;  and  the  world  had  yet  to  wait  two  centuries 
for  the  new  art  of  ruling  and  the  genial  sway  of  Cyrus  the 
Aryan. 

§  285.  It  will  be  appropriate  here  to  anticipate  some 
of  the  results  of  later  historic  development,  and  to  state 
succinctly  what  appear  to  be  the  relations  sustained  by  the 
several  classes  of  subject  states  to  the  ruling  power,  under 
the  new  Assyrian  empire,  and  its  successor  and  imitator, 
the  Chaldtean  (cf.  §  39).  The  importance  of  the  matter 
may  be  suggested  by  the  recollection  that  it  was  by  the 
operation  of  this  system  of  things  that  Israel's  doom  was 
wrought,  the  most  tragic  and  world-moving  epochs  in  its 
history  created,  and  the  course  of  Revelation  itself,  in 
conformity  to  the  occasions  of  that  history,  guided  and 
determined.  The  different  classes  of  subject  states  may 
be  comprehensively  distinguished  as  follows,  the  constant 
element  being,  of  course,  the  acknowledgment  of  the 
sovereignty  of  the  "  Great  King,"  the  "  King  of  Kings,"  the 
"vicegerent  of  the  great  gods,"  and  a  tangible  proof  of 
such  submission  and  deference  in  the  form  of  a  regular 
payment  of  tribute  and  sending  of  gifts. 

§  280.  The  first  mode  of  relation  sustained  by  a  sub- 
ject community  may  be  illustrated  in  a  general  way  by  the 
vassal  states  of  modern  Turkey,  such  as  Bulgaria,  East 
Kumelia,  and  Egypt,  which  are  supposed  to  render  a 
regular  tribute  to  the  suzerain,  but  are  allowed  to  retain 
their  autonomy,  with  their  own  form  of  government  and 
their  own  ruler.  In  these  modern  cases  it  has  happened, 
for  historical  reasons,  that  a  governor  or  viceroy  or  "  prince  " 
holds  sway,  while  the  ancient  vassals  of  Assyria,  like  the 
"  protected "  rajahs  of  modern  British  India,  were  the 
"kings  "  of  the  several  nations  which  were  permitted  their 
own  autonomous  administration.  This  relation  was  very 
common  and  was  brought  about  in  a  variety  of  ways.  A 


330  AUTONOMOUS   DEPENDENCE  BOOK  VI 

mild  degree  of  coercion  might  at  first  be  exercised,  as  by 
the  threatening  approach  of  an  army  of  invasion.  The 
Assyrians  would  then  be  bought  off  by  conciliatory  gifts, 
which  would  henceforth  be  regularly  insisted  on.  Or,  if 
resistance  were  offered  to  the  troops  of  Asshur,  under 
whatever  pretext  they  were  present  in  the  land,  the  neces- 
sary coercion  would  involve  the  imposition  of  a  stated  tax, 
besides  an  immediate  levy  or  indemnity.  This  was  the 
usual  history  of  the  hardier  nations,  such  as  the  fully 
developed  Aramaean  kingdoms  west  of  the  River,  and  the 
states  of  Lower  Babylonia  in  the  first  stage  of  armed  con- 
flict. Or,  again,  when  two  neighbouring  kingdoms  were 
at  war,  one  of  them  might  purchase  with  costly  gifts  the 
support  of  the  Assyrians,  who  would  proceed  to  crush  the 
other  combatant,  and  take  care  at  the  same  time  to  rank 
the  suppliant  monarch  among  his  faithful  subjects,  and,  in 
fact,  insist  on  the  practical  acknowledgment  of  his  over- 
lordship  as  the  condition  of  aid.  Such  relations  we  shall 
see  repeatedly  exemplified  in  the  history  of  Israel  and 
Judah.  As  a  matter  of  course,  the  country  against  which 
intervention  was  invoked  was  also,  if  not  already  a  tribu- 
tary state,  immediately  put  into  that  category  and  under 
much  more  severe  conditions.  The  least  onerous  of  bonds 
were  entered  into  where  any  community,  feeling  the 
importance  of  having  the  favour  of  the  Great  King,  pro- 
pitiated him  by  sending  presents,  such  as,  according  to 
immemorial  Oriental  custom,  supreme  rulers  were  in  the 
habit  of  receiving.1  This  was  apt  to  be  continued  as  an 
act  of  homage,  and  the  suitor  was  held  to  have  acknow- 
ledged the  king  of  Assyria  as  his  over-lord ;  and  while  he 
looked  for  protection  in  case  of  need,  he  was  expected  to 
repeat  his  gifts,  which  naturally  came  at  length  to  be 
regarded  as  a  regular  tribute.  It  was  in  this  way,  for 
example,  that  Jehu  put  Israel  under  bonds  to  Assyria 
(§  242  f.),  so  that  tribute  was  expected  by  his  successors. 
It  will  be  observed  that,  while  the  sentiments  with  which 

1  Cf.  Ps.  xlv.  12  ;  Ixviii.  29 ;  Ixxii.  10  ;  Isa.  xxx.  6. 


Cn.  IV,  §  288     PENALTY  FOR   THE   FIRST   REVOLT  331 

these  various  classes  were  viewed  by  the  great  autocrat 
might  be  very  different,  they  were  all  sooner  or  later  put 
in  the  same  list, — that  long  catalogue  of  "servants  and 
sons  "  (2  K.  xvi.  7)  of  the  ruler  of  the  nations.  The 
essential  characteristic  of  them  all  in  their  relation  to  the 
suzerain  was  that  they  were  regarded  as  having  given  their 
first  recognized  pledge  of  homage,  tribute,  and  feudal 
service. 

§  287.  A  decisive  interval  separates  the  second  class 
from  the  first.  When  any  tributary  state  showed  signs  of 
discontent  and  constructive  hostility  —  by  refusing  to  pay 
the  annual  impost  or  to  furnish  a  requisition  of  troops  or 
supplies,  or  by  secretly  intriguing  with  another  power,  or  in 
any  way  indicating  restlessness  or  a  desire  for  a  change  — 
an  armed  force  was  sent  to  the  recalcitrant  district,  the 
effect  being,  for  the  most  part,  to  awe  it  into  submission, 
though  sometimes  actual  chastisement  had  to  be  inflicted. 

o 

In  any  case,  a  severe  penalty  was  imposed:  a  heavy  fine 
was  laid  on,  and  the  regular  tribute  doubled  or  still  more 
largely  increased,  so  that  the  risk  of  sedition  or  outward 
tokens  of  an  unruly  disposition  became  grave  indeed. 
Hezekiah,  for  example,  found  himself  in  this  category,  as 
his  confession  implies  (2  K.  xviii.  14),  when,  after  a 
visitation  and  warning  received  from  S argon,  he  formed  a 
league  with  the  Philistine  cities  and  withheld  tribute.  In 
flagrant  cases  of  rebellion  and  conspiracy,  as  in  the  case  of 
Hoshea  of  Israel,  the  final  step  of  national  obliteration  was 
taken  at  once. 

$  2<"vS.  If  a  subject  state  in  the  condition  of  last  proba- 
tion, as  defined  above,  should  once  more  revolt  against  the 
yoke  of  servitude,  should  withhold  tribute  or  military 
service,  engage  in  active  insurrection,  or  league  itself 
with  the  enemies  of  Assyria,  its  doom  as  a  nation  was 
summarily  pronounced,  and  its  destruction  at  once  under- 
taken. It  was  incorporated  directly  into  the  empire, 
losing  its  governmental  autonomy:  not  only  was  its  ruler 
dethroned,  but  his  very  function  was  abolished.  Assyrian 


332  EFFECTIVENESS  OF  THE  NEW  SYSTEM       BOOK  VI 

administrators  were  appointed,  of  which  the  chief  and  most 
essential  were  the  civil  governor  (Sakari)  and  the  controller- 
general  of  the  revenue  (zabil  kuduri).  In  addition  to  this, 
in  these  later  times,  the  terribly  effective  system  above 
indicated  was  put  into  operation,  by  virtue  of  which  the 
flower  of  the  community  were  deported  to  some  remote 
region,  or  more  usually  distributed  among  several  districts 
of  the  vast  empire.  To  take  their  place,  a  foreign  popula- 
tion was  introduced,  who  might  themselves  have  been  the 
victims  of  the  same  radical  policy. 

§  289?  The  effectiveness  of  this  last-named  course  of 
treatment  depended,  of  course,  upon  the  energy  and 
thoroughness  with  which  it  was  administered,  but  it  was 
begotten  of  a  profound  practical  foresight  of  the  conse- 
quences. In  the  first  place,  the  sense  of  nationality  as  the 
basis  of  patriotism  could,  in  no  other  way,  be  so  surely 
destroyed.  An  Oriental  community,  whether  in  its  ele- 
mentary state  as  a  tribe,  or  in  its  most  highly  organized 
form  as  a  monarchy,  is  a  society  whose  compactness  and 
solidarity  depend  chiefly  upon  the  continuity  of  local 
aggregation.  After  what  has  been  said  earlier  (§  37,  54), 
there  is  110  need  here  of  demonstrating  the  inherent  neces- 
sity of  this  condition  of  things ;  only  free,  self-governing 
states  can  successfully  act  in  concert  when  not  contiguous 
to  one  another.  It  was,  indeed,  largely  this  element  of 
local  self-government,  exceptionally  developed  among  the 
Jews,  which  enabled  them  to  preserve  their  nationality, 
even  in  the  Babylonian  Exile,  without  a  king  or  a  country. 
Again,  it  will  be  remembered  that  the  worship  of  the 
Semitic  peoples  was  essentially  and  primarily  local.  Not 
only  did  each  city  have  its  own  god,  and  each  state  or 
complex  of  tribes  or  cities  its  own  pantheon,  with  its  own 
predominant  deity,  but  the  very  existence,  or  at  least  the 
potentiality  of  each  divinity,  depended  upon  the  survival 
of  his  local  seat.  Hence,  when  a  community  was  broken 
up,  detruded  from  its  sphere,  scattered  among  strange 
lands,  it  meant  that  the  religion  of  its  people,  its  original 


CH.  IV,  §  290    FORCE  OF  THE  RELIGIOUS  MOTIVE  333 

and  strongest  bond  of  union,  was  annulled  and  abolished. 
To  the  mass  of  the  communities  thus  subverted  by  the 
Assyrians  and  Chaldaeans,  the  ejection  from  their  ancient 
seats  meant  not  simply  that  the}'  were  to  go  and  serve 
other  gods,  but  that  in  so  doing  they  must  ipso  facto  adopt 
another  country  as  their  own.  Thus,  while,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  new  Samarians  had  to  learn  the  ways  of  the  god 
of  the  land,  the  Jews  in  Babylonia,  just  because  their  God 
was  no  local  deity,  but  the  God  of  the  whole  earth,  held 
fast  both  to  their  nationality  and  their  religion. 

§  290.  I  need  not  enlarge  upon  the  effects  of  this  inflic- 
tion, this  climax  of  all  civic  and  domestic  horrors.  But 
before  leaving  the  general  treatment  of  the  subject,  it 
would  be  well  once  more  to  emphasize  the  permanence 
and  power  of  the  religious  motive  in  all  that  was  done 
between  people  and  people  and  nation  and  nation  (cf. 
§  57  f.).  It  was  the  gods  of  Assyria  who  were  to  be 
chiefly  honoured  by  the  triumphs  of  her  arms.  Her  rulers 
reigned  and  waged  war  in  the  name,  and  as  the  vice- 
regents,  of  her  deities.  Rebels  are  constantly  said  to  have 
"broken  the  oath  of  the  great  gods,  the  gods  of  the  king 
of  Assyria."  Delinquents  (of  the  second  and  third  classes 
described  above)  are  called  "sinners,"  because  they  were 
considered,  and  held  themselves  (2  K.  xviii.  14),  to  have 
broken  a  religious  vow.  The  conflicts  were  recognized  on 
both  sides  as  being  waged  between  the  gods  of  the  respec- 
tive nations,  as  the  Rabshakeh  so  forcibly  intimated  in 
his  subtle  address  to  the  people  that  sat  on  the  wall  of 
Jerusalem ;  and  a  failing  and  faithless  nation  was  regarded 
as  being  deserted  by  its  chief  deity,  as  the  same  accom- 
plished diplomat  insinuated  was  the  case  with  the  Jewish 
king  and  his  doomed  dependants  (2  K.  xviii.  22,  25).  It 
was  this  consideration  that  gave  the  crowning  terror  and 
the  deadly  sting  to  the  system  of  subversion  by  deporta- 
tion ;  the  exiles  must  make  their  weary  march  to  a  land  of 
strangers,  leaving  behind  them  their  national  and  house- 
hold gods.  This  policy  was  the  most  refined  and  efficient 


334  INCIDENTAL  BENEFITS  BOOK  VI 

product  of  the  political  genius  of  the  ancient  Semites.  It 
succeeded  in  its  immediate  purpose,  but  all  along  carried 
with  it  and  nourished  the  seeds  of  its  own  final  destruc- 
tion. It  fulfilled  its  doom  according  to  the  word  of  the 
Prophet,  spoken  in  view  of  the  desolation  it  wrought,  of 
the  height  to  which  it  raised  and  the  depth  to  which  it 
hurled  those  "  that  made  the  earth  to  tremble,  that  made 
the  kingdoms  to  quake,  that  made  the  world  like  a 
wilderness  and  overthrew  the  cities  thereof,  that  let  not 
loose  the  prisoners  to  their  homes  "  (Isa.  xiv.). 

§  291.  At  the  same  time,  it  would  be  unjust  to  deny 
that,  in  many  portions  of  the  empire,  certain  remedies  for 
great  and  virulent  disorders  were  wrought  by  this  drastic 
method  of  treatment.  Chief  of  them  was  the  quenching, 
or  serious  discouragement,  among  the  mixed  populations  of 
small  neighbouring  states,  of  the  ancient  feuds  that  had 
made  them  perpetual  foes.  As  an  illustration  of  this  one 
has  only  to  think  of  the  relations  existing  between  the 
various  peoples  of  Palestine  and  Syria,  after  the  deporta- 
tions of  so  many  of  their  inhabitants,  in  contrast  with  the 
bloody  and  devastating  wars  that  raged  in  the  times  of 
David  or  Ahab  or  Ahaz.  Western  Asia,  under  Esarhaddon 
or  Nebuchadrezzar,  was  a  more  peaceful  country,  as  well  as 
a  safer  region  for  travellers  or  traders,  than  it  had  been 
before  the  unification.  Nor  should  it  be  forgotten  that 
the  outcome  of  the  Avhole  system,  the  establishment  of  a 
centralized  government,  with  a  due  adjustment  of  func- 
tions as  between  various  grades  of  officials,  led  to  a  fuller 
and  surer  development  of  the  resources  of  each  district, 
with  greater  economy  in  their  utilization  and  distribution. 
It  also  suggested  wider  and  more  comprehensive  ideas 
of  civil  government  and  the  destinies  of  nations.  It  gave 
to  many  petty  communities  a  notion  of  the  great  world 
outside  them.  Above  all,  it  prepared  the  way  for  the 
better  types  of  world-empires  that  succeeded,  the  last  of 
which  was  to  be  the  indispensable  vehicle  for  the  diffusion 
of  the  truth  about  the  world's  God  and  Saviour,  and  of  the 


CH.  IV,  §  2Q3          ISRAEL  AND  TIGLATHPILESER  335 

hope  of  the  establishment  of  a  Kingdom  that  should  not 
be  moved. 

§  292.  But  our  principal  concern  lies  with  the  little 
kingdoms  west  of  the  Jordan.  How  was  this  organization, 
which  was  to  absorb  small  and  great  alike,  to  affect  the 
fortunes  of  Judah  and  Israel  ?  Was  this  nest  to  be  robbed, 
like  all  the  rest,  by  the  great  spoiler,  and  the  unresisting, 
forsaken  little  birds,  without  moving  the  wing  or  opening 
the  mouth  (Isa.  x.  14)  to  be  borne  away,  never  to  return, 
to  the  branches  that  had  sheltered  the  parent  dove  (Ps. 
Ixxiv.  19)  so  long  and  so  safely?  History  gives  a  reply; 
but  the  answer  would  be  only  half  an  answer,  and  the  story 
would  be  only  half  told,  if  we  did  not,  at  the  same  time, 
listen  to  the  profounder  word  of  Prophecy  (§  13  f.).  With 
what  message,  and  in  what  spirit,  the  Prophets  intervened, 
we  shall  have  opportunity  to  tell  when  the  occasions  of 
their  intervention  have  been  more  fully  unfolded. 

§  293.  The  condition  of  Palestine  in  the  middle  of  the 
eighth  century  B.C.,  and  the  years  immediately  following, 
has  already  been  brought  under  review.  It  was  not  long 
before  the  new  vicegerent  of  Asshur  made  his  presence  felt 
in  that  region,  whose  distracted  condition  seemed  almost  to 
invite  the  presence  of  an  arbiter.  But  the  affairs  of  the 
West-land  were  not  the  first  subject  that  engaged  the 
attention  of  Tiglathpileser.  After  seeing  order  restored 
in  the  disaffected  and  disturbed  districts  near  the  capital, 
he  decided  that  Babylonia  should  be  the  scene  of  his  first 
military  operations.  In  that  region,  the  half-nomadic 
Aramaean  tribes  and  the  small  Chaldaean  states  (§  223) 
had  been  long  encroaching  from  all  sides  on  Central 
Babylonia,  and  were  probably  as  obnoxious  to  the  king  of 
Babylon,  Nabonassar  (747-734),  as  to  the  Assyrians. 
This  ruler,  who  has  become  famous  a,s  the  eponym  of  the 
era  with  which  the  canon  of  Ptolemy  begins,  was  perhaps 
friendly  to  Assyria.  Tiglathpileser,  five  months  after  his 
accession  (Sept.  745),  began  his  march  to  the  River-land. 
As  far  as  can  be  gathered,  he  confined  himself  in  this 


336  BABYLONIA  AND  MEDIA  BOOK  VI 

campaign  to  securing  the  southern  boundary  against  the 
Aramaeans,  and  the  establishing  of  strong  fortresses  for 
the  purpose  of  overawing  the  turbulent  elements  in 
Babylonia.  The  leading  Aramaean  tribes,  southeastward 
of  Baghdad  on  the  Tigris,  he  thoroughly  subdued,  and 
followed  up  the  more  scattered  bands  of  the  same  family 
down  that  river  to  the  borders  of  the  Gulf.  Between  the 
Rivers  he  seized  the  city  of  Sippar,  and  received  pro- 
pitiatory presents  from  the  priests  of  Babylon  and  other 
rich  seats  of  the  great  temple-worship,  who  were  doubtless 
glad  enough  to  welcome  the  representative  of  a  firm 
government,  as  against  the  rapacious  Aramaean  and  Clial- 
dtean  intruders.  Two  cities  were  built  and  fortified  at 
strategic  points,  and  he  at  once  illustrated  his  favourite 
policy  by  colonizing  them  with  the  prisoners  already  taken 
in  war,  and  forcing  them  to  do  garrison  service  under  his 
lieutenants.1  Nippur  was  the  southern  limit  of  this 
expedition,  by  which  he  earned  the  title  "king  of  Simmer 
and  Akkad"  (§  110). 

§  294.  The  next  year  (744)  witnessed  the  subjugation 
of  Namar,  the  mountain-land  east  of  the  Lower  Zab. 
Thence  his  troops  proceeded  eastward,  and  received  the 
tribute  of  many  of  the  Median  chiefs,  without,  however, 
annexing  any  of  their  territory  to  his  empire.  His  plan 
was  rather,  in  the  meanwhile,  to  prevent  trouble  from  the 
side  of  any  of  the  countries  near  Assyria,  whose  permanent 
reduction  and  occupation  would  have  involved  him  in 
delay  and  loss,  while  the  more  important  regions  to  the 
far  west,  which  he,  like  his  predecessors,  held  to  be  the 
chief  prizes,  would  remain  unsubdued  and  unprofitable  to 
Asshur.  Accordingly,  he  determined  to  march  at  once 

o    «/  ' 

against  the  West-land,  with  the  immediate  purpose  of 
securing  Arpad,  the  key-city  of  Syria,  then  a  great  fortress 
about  fifteen  miles  northeast  of  Aleppo  (cf.  §  250).  In 
this  he  seems  to  have  been  over-hasty.  At  any  rate,  we 

1  Lay.  17,  4-7  ;  II  R.  67,  5-13  ;  cf.  Cb  for  745  B.C. 


CH.  IV,  §  295         ARMENIA  AND  NORTHERN  SYRIA  337 

find,  according  to  the  notice  in  the  Eponym  Canon,  that, 
while  Arpad  was  still  the  centre  of  operations,  he  came 
in  conflict  with  the  Armenians,  whose  forces  he  defeated. 
His  own  inscriptions  give  some  details,  according  to  which 
it  would  appear  that  a  great  league  was  formed  against 
him,  composed  of  Armenia,  still  a  power  of  wide-reaching 
influence  (cf.  §  256),  and  its  tributary  or  allied  states. 
The  decisive  conflicts  took  place  in  Kommagene,  and  the 
campaign  ended  in  a  complete  defeat  of  the  northern  con- 
federates, with  the  result  that  the  first  serious  check  was 
put  upon  the  ambitious  career  of  the  rulers  of  the  land  of 
the  Lakes.  It  is  noteworthy,  as  illustrating  the  main 
purpose  of  Tiglathpileser,  that  we  find  him  engaged  in 
and  about  Arpad  for  the  next  three  years  (743-740). 
The  endurance  of  this  city  against  the  victorious  forces  of 
the  great  conqueror  reminds  one  of  the  similar  heroism 
displayed  by  Damascus  (§  251).  It  was  finally  taken,  and 
thenceforward  it  was  used  as  a  vantage-ground  for  the 
subjection  both  of  Syria  on  the  south,  and  of  the  Cilicians, 
Hettites,  and  Cappadocians  on  the  north,  who,  no  doubt, 
kept  all  his  available  forces  busy  during  the  siege.  The 
fall  of  Arpad  was  followed  by  the  subjection  of  these 
powerful  communities.  After  some  little  further  resis- 
tance from  the  half-Hettite  district  west  of  the  Orontes, 
the  whole  of  Northern  Syria  was  formally  incorporated 
into  the  empire,  and  furnished  with  a  regular  administra- 
tion. These  matters  occupied  the  year  739. 

§  295.  In  Israel  and  Judah,  whose  fortunes  were  to  be 
so  vitally  affected  by  these  movements  of  the  Assyrian 
armies,  there  seems  to  have  been  but  one  class  of  men  who 
estimated  the  events  of  the  times  at  anything  like  their 
permanent  and  essential  value.  These  were  the  Prophets. 
The  importance  of  their  writings  as  sources  of  infor- 
mation and  means  of  historic  classification  has  already 
been  alluded  to  (§  13  f.).  It  will  now  be  necessary  to 
note  carefully  their  attitude  towards  the  several  active 
elements  in  the  impending  revolution,  as  well  as  their 


338  THE  HEBREW  PROPHETS  AND  THE  STATE      BOOK  VI 

ideas  upon  the  moral  and  political  issues  involved  in  the 
struggle.  All  attentive  Bible  readers  have  noticed  that 
the  rise  of  written  Prophecy  was  coincident  with  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  Assyrians  upon  the  national  horizon  of 
^  Judah  and  Israel.  We  have  now  seen  enough  of  the  pre- 
determining occasions  of  Prophecy  to  learn  that  this  was 
much  more  than  a  mere  coincidence.  There  was  no  inter- 
rupting chasm  between  unwritten  and  written  Prophecy; 
the  fundamental  message  of  Elijah  and  Elisha  was  the  same 
as  that  delivered  by  Joel  and  Amos,  Isaiah  and  Micah,-— 
the  moral  necessity  of  the  recognition  and  pure  worship  of 
Jehovah,  and  of  the  practical  fulfilment  of  the  law  of 
righteousness,  which  was  the  essence  of  his  character. 
The  difference  between  the  two  was  that  the  form  and 
content  of  the  message,  in  the  case  of  the  latter  class,  were 
broader  and  deeper  than  in  that  of  the  former ;  the  examples 
and  the  lessons  of  their  teaching  were  not  merely  of 
national,  but  of  international,  or,  rather,  of  world-wide, 
significance  and  applicability. 

§  296.  The  interest  of  the  Prophets  in  political  and 
social  affairs,  whether  domestic  or  foreign,  was  secondary 
and  indirect,  but  necessarily  very  keen  and  constant.  The 
moral  conduct  and  spiritual  temper  of  the  people,  while 
matters  of  individual  responsibility,  were  affected  in  a 
thousand  different  ways  by  external  influences;  and,  in 
the  period  of  transition  to  written  Prophecy,  occasions  and 
inducements  of  actions  which  demanded  public  recogni- 
tion and  comment  became  much  more  numerous  and 
complicated.  The  principal  of  these  have  already  been 
indicated  in  another  connection  (§  271).  Government,  in 
the  old  days,  had  been  a  very  simple  matter,  transacted 
mainly  by  the  elders  at  the  city  gates,  while  the  king 
and  his  modest  court  officials  contented  themselves  with 
the  care  of  the  national  defence,  and  the  collection  and 
administration  of  the  revenue  necessary  for  that  prime 
purpose.  But  in  the  era  which  began  with  "the  house  of 
Omri  "  in  Israel,  a  change  gradually  but  surely  took  place, 


CH.  IV,  §  297     SOCIAL  EVILS  AND  THEIR  REMEDY  339 

due  to  the»  more  complex  relations  resulting  from  an 
extension  of  commerce,  international  entanglements,  and 
the  influence  of  extra-Israelitish  manners  and  worship 
upon  the  simple  habits  and  faith  of  a  race  of  agriculturists 
and  shepherds.  Judah  was  slower  in  coming  under  the 
new  order  of  things ;  but  before  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
Uzziah  it  presented,  as  we  have  seen,  the  same  aspect  as 
did  the  Northern  Kingdom,  and  was  largely  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  same  dangerous  elements.  The  principal  evils 
which  the  Prophets  sought  to  counteract  were  such  as,  in 
every  age,  have  threatened  the  stability  and  welfare  of  all 
states  that  have  been  founded  in  justice,  temperance,  and 
the  fear  of  God,  and  have  had  a  strong  access  of  material 
prosperity;  they  were  the  familiar  and  fashionable  vices 
of  greed,  dishonesty,  sensuality,  along  with  the  less  vulgar 
sins  of  frivolity  and  impiety.  It  was  the  external  occa- 
sions provocative  of  such  iniquities,  that  justified  the 
interference  of  the  Prophets  in  public  affairs :  corruption 
in  high  places,  oppression  of  the  poor,  relaxing  of  the 
social  bond  through  class  distinctions  and  jealousies,  an 
increasing  tendency  to  centralization  and  despotism  in 
the  government,  and,  darkening  all,  the  black  shadow 
of  strange  worship,  with  its  seductions  and  abomi- 
nations. 

§  297.  The  essential  elements  of  Israel's  salvation, 
according  to  the  Prophets,  whose  work  and  word  were 
devoted  to  their  conservation  and  development,  were, 
accordingly,  these  two:  holiness  and  morality;  the  former 
consisting  in  the  pure  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  the  latter, 
its  inseparable  accompaniment,  resting  upon  the  practical 
fulfilling  of  his  will.  And  as  soon  as  the  national  exis- 
tence became  visibly  dependent  upon  foreign  entangle- 
ments, and  the  national  worship  likely  to  be  debased  by 
the  introduction  of  strange  deities,  the  question  of  outside 
influences  became  one  of  vital  importance  to  the  spokes- 
men of  Jehovah.  Moreover,  the  subject  of  international 
relations  kept  continually  growing  in  importance  until 


340  UNIVERSALITY    OF   THE   ISSUE  BOOK  VI 

it  assumed  an  illimitable  moral  magnitude,  with  the 
threatened  absorption  of  Israel  into  the  great  world- 
grasping  empire  of  Assyria.  The  chosen  people  were  to 
be  led  to  see  that  Jehovah  was  not  only  the  God  of  Israel 
but  the  God  of  the  whole  world ;  and  that  while  he  had, 
in  a  special  sense,  known  them  only  of  all  the  families  of 
the  earth,  he  had  also  determined  the  place  and  the  history 
of  the  nations  with  whose  fortunes  their  own  were  insep- 
arably intertwined.  Thus  he  had  indeed  brought  up 
Israel  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  but  had  likewise  brought 
the  Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  the  Aramseans  from  Kir 
(Amos  ix.  7;  cf.  §  3).  And  while  the  nation  which  was 
overturning  the  kingdoms  and  making  the  earth  desolate 
was  seeking  to  subject  everything  to  Asshur,  Jehovah  was 
controlling  its  destiny  also,  and  making  it  the  instrument 
of  his  purpose  (Is.  x.  5  ff.).  The  word  of  Jehovah  to  the 
Prophets  was  therefore  fraught  with  a  universality,  as  well 
as  an  infinite  depth  of  meaning,  that  made  it  a  message  for 
all  peoples,  the  interpreter  of  History  for  all  the  ages, 
and,  at  the  same  time,  the  proclamation  of  the  birth-time 
of  a  new  spiritual  world. 

§  298.  Now  this  function  of  Prophecy,  as  "the  teach- 
ing" par  excellence  (Isa.  xlii.  21),  whereby  Jehovah's 
people  should  learn  of  his  ways  towards  them  and  towards 
the  nations,  brought  the  Prophets  into  an  attitude  of 
divided  interest  with  relation  to  present  and  impending 
struggles.  And  the  significance  of  their  utterances  for 
the  understanding  of  this  whole  period  lies  chiefly  in  a 
twofold  excitation  and  direction  of  their  sympathies  and 
efforts,  as  they  insisted  that  subjection  to  the  great 
despoiler  of  the  nations  was  to  be  dreaded,  and  yet  that 
it  was  necessary.  On  the  one  hand,  a  closer  rapproche- 
ment with  any  foreign  country  in  any  form,  and  especially 
with  the  most  influential  of  all  the  nations,  was  to  be 
deprecated  as  the  worst  possible  calamity,  and  that  for 
many  reasons,  which  now  require  little  explanation.  The 
social  fabric  would  be  still  further  undermined  by  reason 


CH.  IV,  §  299      EVILS   OF  FOREIGN   DOMINATION  341 

of  more  intimate  association  with  foreign  modes  of  thought 
and  living,  and  contact  with  them  at  more  numerous 
points.  The  simple  society  of  Israel  would  be  broken  up 
completely  under  the  influence  of  autocratic  and  aristo- 
cratic pride,  which  would  set  the  fashion  for  the  rulers 
and  grandees,  as  well  as  determine  the  tendency  of  Israel's 
laws  and  customs;  and  class  distinctions,  which  already 
portended  a  social  revolution,  would  be  developed  to  a 
degree  that  would  destroy  the  basis  of  the  national  weal. 
More  than  anything  else,  it  was  civil  quietude  and  domestic 
contentment  that  furnished  the  outward  conditions  of 
religious  and  moral  steadfastness  and  progress.  The 
foundation  of  society  was  the  old  agricultural  life,  with 
its  '"homely  joys  and  destiny  obscure,"  its  frugality  and 
individual  independence.  Assimilation,  from  any  cause, 
with  the  trading  nations  round  about,  would  tend  to  foster 
the  commercial  spirit  and  dislodge,  debase,  and  disfranchise 
the  tillers  of  the  soil.  Absorption  in  the  great  Assyrian 
empire  would  mean  the  unification  of  Israel  with  the  other 
subject  states,  and  the  destruction  of  the  distinctive  fea- 
tures of  its  national  and  social  life. 

§  299.  But,  most  of  all  was  the  loss  of  Israel's  auton- 
omy to  be  dreaded  because  of  the  dependence  of  the 
national  existence  upon  the  purity  of  faith  and  worship. 
It  is  now  a  familiar  idea  to  us  (see  especially  §  58),  that, 
among  the  ancient  Semites,  the  worship  of  the  national 
deity  was  the  bond  of  national  unity,  and  that  this,  in  its 
turn,  was  conditioned  upon  the  maintenance  of  the  national 
life  and  prosperity.  And  it  followed  from  this  universally 
recognized  principle,  that  a  mixture  or  assimilation,  on 
any  considerable  scale,  of  two  or  more  peoples,  involved  to 
a  corresponding  extent  a  syncretism  of  their  respective 
cults,  and  practically  of  their  religious  beliefs ;  that  even 
the  vassalage  of  one  nation  to  another  brought  with  it  at 
least  an  outward  acknowledgment  of  the  gods  of  the 
suzerain;  and  that  the  extinction  of  one  nationality  by 
another  had  for  its  result  the  effacement  of  the  conquered 


342  THE  TRUE   RELIGION  AND  HOME-RULE         BOOK  VI 

religion.1  These  considerations  throw  a  flood  of  light  for 
us  upon  the  attitude  and  teaching  of  the  Prophets  of  the 
Assyrian  and  Chaldaean  times.  The  worship  of  Jehovah 
must,  in  their  view,  be  maintained,  not  only  as  the  foun- 
dation of  moral  order  and  social  security,  but  also  as  the 
most  vital  and  cardinal  principle  of  the  national  life,  and 
the  most  essential  condition  of  the  national  existence. 
And  loyalty  to  Jehovah,  and  obedience  to  his  will,  were 
fettered  and  imperilled  if  tribute  and  homage  were  to  be 
paid  to  other  nations,  which  was  the  same  thing  as 
rendering  them  to  other  and  strange  gods.  We  now  see 
clearly  of  what  consequence  the  aims  and  measures  of  the 
new  Assyrian  empire  (§  282)  were  to  the  heroic  souls  that 
agonized  in  thought  and  speech  for  the  survival  of  the 
feeble  and  struggling  nation  of  Israel  and  of  the  faith  of 
Jehovah  as  its  only  hope.  To  accept  help  from  Assyria 
against  a  dreaded  foe  was,  in  the  popular  view,  to  enjoy 
the  favour  and  protection  of  the  Assyrian  gods ;  to  become 
tributary  to  Assyria  was  to  render  homage  to  the  same 
deities,  with  the  inducement  to  combine  their  worship 
with  that  of  Jehovah;  to  be  annexed  to  Assyria,  as  the 
penalty  of  rebellion  and  defiance,  while,  in  the  view  of 
the  conquerors,  it  was  the  just  punishment  of  sin  against 
Asshur,  would  be  held,  by  them  and  the  conquered  alike, 
to  imply  the  defeat  and  dethronement  of  the  God  of  Israel. 
True  it  is,  that  the  Prophets  themselves,  and  a  small 
faithful  remnant,  knew  better  the  nature  of  Jehovah;  and 
that  their  work  and  teaching,  combined  with  the  discipline 
of  calamity  and  mourning,  resulted  in  the  triumph  of  a 
surer  faith  in  his  universal  Godhead  and  providence,  in 

1  This  principle  explains  Hos.  x.  5  f.  :  "The  inhabitants  of  Samaria 
shall  be  in  trepidation  for  the  calf-god  of  Beth-aven  (Bethel) ;  her  people 
are  in  grief,  and  her  priests  begin  to  tremble  because  of  its  glory  which 
has  gone  away  from  her  into  exile  ;  it,  too,  shall  be  carried  into  Assyria  as 
an  offering  to  the  Great  King."  The  word  for  "  carry  "  here  is  connected 
with  the  Assyrian  biltu  "  tribute."  The  Inscriptions  abound  in  passages 
telling  how  the  kings  of  Asshur  despoil  the  conquered  peoples  of  their 
dethroned  and  superseded  deities.  Cf.  2  Sam.  v.  21  ;  Isa.  xlvi.  1  f. 


CH.  IV,  §  300    THE  OUTLOOK  TO   THE  PROPHETS  343 

the  heart  of  a  restored  and  purified  Israel.  But  they  knew 
also  that  the  belief  and  fidelity  of  a  small  minority  could 
not  weigh  against  the  prejudices,  passions,  and  interests 
of  the  ignorant  majorit}*,  with  the  rulers  and  nobles  at 
their  head,  who  believed  practically  in  the  god  that  was  on 
the  side  of  the  strongest  battalions;  and  they  rightly 
anticipated  the  influx  of  social  and  moral  evils  that  would 
come  with  the  Assyrians  into  the  land.  Hence,  they  took 
their  stand  for  the  ancient  principle,  which  to  them  had  all 
the  force  of  a  theocratic  maxim,  that  Israel,  God's  peculiar 
possession,  should  dwell  by  itself  among  the  nations 
(Deut.  xxxiii.  28;  cf.  Num.  xxiii.  9).  The  time  might 
indeed  come  (as  it  actually  did  come)  when  it  would  be 
the  part  of  wisdom  and  true  patriotism  to  rest  quietly 
under  the  yoke  of  the  foreign  tyrant;  but  this  was  to  be 
urged  on  the  ground  that  resistance  would  be  useless,  and 
that  failure  would  result  in  the  final  destruction  of  the 
state  and  of  the  national  worship. 

§  300.  But  there  was  another  side  to  this  whole  ques- 
tion of  international  relations.  While  the  Prophets  recog- 
nized it  to  be  the  ideal  of  Israel's  destiny  that  it  should 
dwell  apart  from  what  was  unclean  and  unholy,  they  knew 
well  that  that  had  rarely  been  Israel's  lot  in  the  past,  and 
they  were  not  deceived  into  thinking  that  the  future  would 
bring  the  needed  isolation  and  renovation.  Nor  did  they 
dream  that  the  divided  Israel  was  strong  enough  to  subdue 
its  hereditary  foes,  or  the  mightier  armies  of  the  Great 
King.  Much  less  was  it  possible  that  the  holy  remnant 
in  Israel,  who  struggled  in  vain  against  the  corruptions 
of  their  own  people,  could  make  the  law  of  Jehovah  prevail 
among  the  nations  before  the  glorious  day  of  the  Messiah 
should  come,  whose  rays  had  only  begun  to  dawn  upon  the 
dark  political  horizon.  The  prospect  of  the  realization  of  the 
old  ideal  of  freedom  and  righteousness  was  dimmed,  even 
in  the  prosperous  times  that  followed  the  decline  of  Syria, 
by  forebodings  of  national  distress,  that  was  to  culminate 
in  the  most  dreaded  of  all  calamities,  —  captivity  and  exile. 


344  THE   SIGNIFICANCE   OF  EXILE  BOOK  VI 

§  301.  There  is  no  word  in  the  language  of  the  Hebrews 
more  full  of  tragic  suggestiveness  than  the  word  for  exile 
(TOT).  The  pathetic  associations  of  banishment,  the 
same  in  all  ages  to  lovers  of  home  and  country,  have  been 
commemorated  for  us  by  the  most  illustrious  exile  of  his 
time :  — 

Tu  lascerai  ogni  cosa  diletta 
Piii  caramente  ;  e  questo  e  quello  strale 
Che  1'  arco  dell'  esilio  pria  saetta. 
Tu  proverai  si  come  sa  di  sale 
Lo  pane  altrui,  e  com'  e  duro  calle 
Lo  scendere  e  il  salir  per  1'  altrui  scale. 
Et  quel  che  piii  ti  gravera  le  spalle, 
Sara  la  compagnia  malvagia  e  scempia, 
Con  la  qual  tu  cadrai  in  questa  valle.1 

Through  such  associations  it  came  to  signify  misery  and 
misfortune  in  general  (Job  xlii.  10;  Ezek.  xvi.  53),  having 
thus  passed  through  a  development  of  meaning  exactly  like 
that  of  the  German  JElend.2  Patriotic  and  religious  souls, 
feeling  so  keenly  the  need  of  isolated  freedom,  looked  back 
upon  the  bondage  of  Egypt  as  the  one  extreme  type  of 
distress  and  humiliation  in  the  past;  and  as  misfortunes 
were  now  coming  thickly  upon  Israel,  each  of  them  was  a 
foretaste  and  partial  experience  of  "captivity,"  suggesting 
the  awful  dread  that  the  national  life  might  yet  be  extin- 
guished in  a  wholesale  subjugation  and  oppression,  like 
that  which  preceded  and  conditioned  the  nation's  birth. 

§  302.  The  Prophet  Amos  already  uses  the  phrase  with 
a  significance  and  emphasis  which  the  circumstances  can 
be  made  to  justify  only  when  we  interpret  them  in  the 
light  of  this  larger  suggestion.  Speaking  and  working 
for  the  northern  kingdom,  but  keeping  his  own  people  of 
Judah  also  in  mind,  he  has  rankling  within  him  the  fresh 
recollection  of  the  cruelty  of  the  Tyrian  and  Philistian 
slave-hunters.  But  he  broadens  the  circle  of  his  observa- 

1  Dante,  Paradiso,  xvii,  55-63. 

2  Old  German  elilenti,  Anglo-Saxon  eleland,  "another  land." 


Cu.  IV,  §  303  AMOS  AND  HIS  MESSAGE  345 

tion,  and  his  historic  retrospect  and  prospect.  The  Ara- 
maeans of  Damascus  are  now  brought  forward  as  the  chief 
oppressors  of  God's  people,  and  with  them  are  arraigned 
the  Edomites  and  Ammonites.  But  he  goes  decisively 
beyond  these  peoples  also,  and  declares  that  what  Israel 
had  suffered  from  them,  lamentable  and  serious  as  it  was, 
should,  under  the  divine  appointment,  be  followed  by  a 
devastation  of  the  whole  country,  and  an  actual  deporta- 
tion of  its  inhabitants,  who  were  to  "go  into  captivity 
beyond  Damascus"  (v.  27;  cf.  vi.  14;  iv.  2  f . ;  vi.  7;  vii. 
17;  ix.  4,  8  f.).  Thus  we  have  the  fateful  Assyrians,  not 
indeed  mentioned  by  name,  yet  unmistakably  alluded  to. 
And  what  is  most  remarkable,  as  an  evidence  of  the 
Prophet's  foresight,  he  predicts  the  triumph  of  the  empire 
of  the  Tigris  over  all  the  western  nations,  at  a  time 
(c.  765)  when  not  only  was  Israel  at  the  height  of  its 
power,1  but  Assyria  was  more  depressed  than  it  had  been 
for  over  a  hundred  years,  and  had  enough  to  do  to  pre- 
serve its  own  autonomy  (§  257  f.). 

§  303.  But  the  Prophets  regarded  these  movements, 
whether  impending  or  in  progress,  as  having  less  political 
than  religious  import.  Their  patriotism  received  its  chief 
inspiration  from  the  thought  that  their  people  was  the 
people  of  the  living  God;  and  even  the  outward  preserva- 
tion of  Israel  became  to  them  of  less  consequence  than 
their  fidelity  to  Jehovah.  God's  righteousness  was  the 
principle  for  which  they  stood;  and  that  must  be  vindicated 
whatever  should  become  of  the  nation  which  alone  he  had 
known  among  the  families  of  the  earth.  If  the  holy  people 
should  be  holy  only  in  their  name  and  election,  and  refuse- 
to  conform  to  the  will  of  their  Covenant  God  in  its 
manifest  requirements,  that  vindication  must  still  take 
place  in  the  punishment  of  those  who  were  guilty  of  such 
gross  infidelity.  They  chose  to  serve  other  gods  in  the 
holy  land,  but  their  fate  must  be  to  serve  them  rather  in 
unholy  ("unclean")  lands,  where  both  the  worship  and 

1  Cf.  Green,  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  p.  347  f. 


346  THE   ISSUES   MADE   CLEAKER  BOOK  VI 

the  presence  of  Jehovah  were  unknown  (Amos  vii.  IT; 
Hos.  ix.  3  f.).  Banishment  and  captivity  were,  there- 
fore, the  just  and  necessary  meed  of  punishment  for  sins 
which  the  righteous  God  of  Israel  could  not  tolerate,  and 
which  the  Prophets  spent  their  lives  in  denouncing  and 
combating. 

§  304.  The  issues  were  made  clearer  as  the  motives  of 
the  action  were  gradually  developed  and  the  actors  began 
to  come  upon  the  arena.  Thus,  while  Amos  dwells  upon 
the  idea  of  exile  for  Israel,  he,  as  already  said,  does  not 
name  that  great  empire,  within  whose  ample  territory  the 
deported  Hebrews  should  find  their  place  of  banishment. 
Hosea,  his  next  successor  in  the  northern  kingdom,  finds 
himself  at  the  inauguration  of  the  new  Assyrian  regime, 
when  Tiglathpileser,  victorious  over  the  Armenians  and 
Northern  Syria,  appears  on  the  borders  of  Palestine.  The 
author  of  Zech.  ix.  ff.  watches  the  same  movements  on 
behalf  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  and  foresees  that  kingdom 
as  already  under  Assyrian  dominion.  But  we  must  not 
anticipate  the  historical  relations  of  these  and  subsequent 
Prophets,  whose  utterances  we  cannot  appreciate  till  we 
have  seen  the  development  of  the  Assyrian  policy  in  the 
West-land.  We  shall  now,  therefore,  return  to  the  scene 
of  military  operations  in  Northern  Syria. 


CHAPTER   V 

NORTHERN  ISRAEL  A   VASSAL   TO  ASSYRIA 

§  305.  OUR  sketch  of  the  progress  of  Tiglathpileser 
in  his  career  of  western  conquest  was  interrupted  (§  294) 
at  the  point  of  time  when  he  had  received  the  homage  of 
Northern  Syria,  after  his  subjugation  of  Arpad,  and  had 
organized  all  that  region  under  Assyrian  administration. 
The  eighth  year  of  his  reign  (738)  witnessed  the  taking 
of  a  decisive  step  in  his  conquest  of  the  West-land.  The 
chief  obstacle  in  his  march  southward  was  offered  by  the 
powerful  state  formed  under  the  hegemony  of  Hamath. 
Over  the  region  thereby  included  he  claimed  jurisdiction, 
on  the  ground  of  the  conquests  of  Ramman-nirari  III, 
made  over  forty  years  before,  and  held  a  few  years  longer 
on  precarious  tenure  by  his  feeble  successors  (§  250, 
257  f.).  Surprisingly  enough,  the  present  movement  of 
the  Assyrian  invader  is  found,  according  to  the  generally 
accepted  interpretation  of  a  fragmentary  inscription,  to 
bring  him  directly  into  conflict  with  the  kingdom  of  Judah. 

§  306.  From  the  hints  given  us  in  the  inscriptions  of 
Tiglathpileser  himself,  and  the  notices  contained  in  the 
Bible,  it  is  possible  for  us  to  form  a  fairly  correct  concep- 
tion of  the  condition  of  affairs  in  Palestine  at  this  juncture. 
The  rapidly  changing  fortunes  of  its  leading  states  at  this 
time  are  suggestive  of  an  historical  kaleidoscope.  Jero- 
boam II,  the  restorer  of  Israel's  power  aud  prestige,  had 
been  but  a  few  years  dead,  and  his  dominions  had  shrunk 
away  under  the  anarchy  and  misrule  that  followed  his 
death  (§  267),  to  the  limits  of  the  realm  controlled  by  the 

347 


348  SAMARIA,  HAMATH,  AND  JUDAH  BOOK  VI 

founder  of  his  dynasty.  Menahem,  who  now  sat  upon  the 
throne  of  Samaria,  had  a  heavy  task  to  maintain  his 
usurped  authority,  which  he  was  unable  fully  to  do,  even 
after  he  had  adopted  measures  of  extreme  rigour  and 
barbarity  against  those  who  refused  their  allegiance  (2  K. 
xv.  16).  His  kingdom,  instead  of  forming  a  barrier  to 
the  threatened  invasion  of  the  Assyrians,  was  rather  in  a 
condition  to  invite  their  approach  and  intervention.  But 
Judah,  which  had  become,  through  the  energy  and  military 
genius  of  Uzziah  (§  268),  a  truly  formidable  power,  was 
now,  in  the  closing  days  of  his  reign,  in  a  position  to 
which  it  had  never  before  attained,  and  which  it  was  not 
long  to  occupy.  A  decisive  proof  of  the  justness  of  this 
estimate  is  apparently  furnished  by  a  fragment  of  the 
annals  of  Tiglathpileser.  After  the  taking  of  Arpad,  and 
while  the  states  of  Northern  Syria  were  being  reduced  and 
organized,  Hamath  and  its  subject  cities  became  convinced 
of  their  own  imminent  danger.  They  looked  for  aid  to 
the  lands  as  yet  unsubdued,  and  sought  protection  from 
the  most  powerful  ruler  of  the  West,  Uzziah,  king  of 
Judah. 

§  307.  The  course  of  events  is  obscure  until  the  arrival 
of  Tiglathpileser  at  the  border  of  Israel.  Whatever  may 
have  been  the  part  played  by  Uzziah,  his  allies  in  Northern 
and  Middle  Syria  received  no  benefit  from  their  treaty 
with  him,  and  were  speedily  brought  to  subjection.  After 
an  enumeration  of  the  various  districts  by  name  and 
locality,  the  annals  of  the  king,  under  the  year  738,  sum 
up  the  results  of  this  campaign  as  follows : l  "  Nineteen 
districts  belonging  to  Hamath,  with  their  circumjacent 
towns  lying  along  the  shore  of  the  Western  Sea,  which  in 
sinfulness  (cf.  §  290)  and  vileness  had  allied  themselves  2 
to  Azariah,  I  restored  to  the  territory  of  the  land  of 

1  So  I  translate  III  R.  9,  30  ff. 

2  The  much-disputed  word  ekimu.  I  take  to  be  for  iklmu,  from  a  root 
C"-,  to  "  combine,  associate."     Cf.  kimu,  "  family,"  etc.     No  good  sense 
can  be  got  from  c:x4,  to-"  take,  seize." 


CH.  V,  §  307       ANNEXATION  OF  MIDDLE  SYRIA  349 

Asshur ;  my  governors  and  administrators  I  set  over  them." 
The  description  shows  that  the  newly  annexed  territory l 
stretched  from  Hamath  westward  to  the  sea,  and  included 
the  southerly  slopes  of  Mount  Amanus,  the  northerly 
declivities  of  Lebanon,  and  the  country  lying  between. 
This  was  an  important  step  towards  the  conquest  of  the 
rest  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  and  the  exclusion  of  Egypt 
from  all  share  in  Asiatic  affairs.  The  similar  conquests 
made  already  (§  227,  250)  had  been  lost  to  Assyria.  Now 
Tiglathpileser  takes  care  that  the  land,  with  its  abundant 
forests,  its  strong  fortresses,  and  its  varied  resources, 
should  be  secured  perpetually ;  and  he  puts  in  practice  his 
system  of  deportation  and  repopulation,  whose  effective- 
ness he  had  already  proved  in  the  east  and  north. 
Accordingly,  we  learn  that  30,300  captives,  taken  in  his 
other  wars,  were  settled  in  the  old  domain  of  Hamath,  and 
that  many  of  the  native  inhabitants  were  transferred  to 
Ulluba,  in  Cappadocia,  whither,  according  to  the  Eponym 
Canon,  one  of  his  main  expeditions  of  739  had  been 
directed.  It  is  further  detailed  how  the  annexed  districts 
were  administered  as  part  of  the  Assyrian  empire.  What 
immediately  preceded  the  conquest  and  annexation  of  these 
cities  of  Middle  Syria  is  not  so  easily  made  out.  The 
brief  phrases  which  appear  plainly  here  and  there  in  the 
mutilated  lines  that  introduce  the  report  of  the  subjugation 
of  the  territory  of  Hamath,  seem  to  support  the  view  that 
Judah  had  been  exercising  a  protectorate  over  the  nineteen 
districts.  Other  portions  of  Syria  seem  also  to  have  sought 
his  protection ;  but  they  were  overawed  by  the  pomp  and 
tumult  of  the  Assyrian  army  on  the  march  and  the 
destruction  already  effected  by  it.  Their  forces  submitted 
with  little  or  no  resistance,  in  order  to  escape  annihila- 
tion, their  chief  cities  being  then  razed  and  devastated. 
The  Hamathseans,  who  were  in  treaty  with  Azariah, 
encouraged  him  to  take  the  lead  in  resisting  further 
aggression.  Whether  he  succeeded  or  not  we  do  not  as 

1  Among  the  districts  is  mentioned  Hadrach  (§  258). 


350  EFFECT  ON  THE  STATUS  OF  JUDAH          BOOK  VI 

yet  fully  know;  but  it  seems  likely  that  he  did,  and  that 
an  army  sent  by  him  to  co-operate  with  the  beleaguered 
districts  was  driven  back,  hemmed  in  by  the  troops  of 
Asshur,  and  forced  to  surrender.1 

§  308.  Uzziah  (Azariah)  was  then  in  the  very  latest 
days  of  his  life,  and  Jotham  was  acting  as  regent  (2  K. 
xv.  5),  and  directing  all  military  movements,  though 
apparently  not  determining  the  national  policy.  The 
effect  of  the  campaign  of  738  upon  the  fortunes  of  Judah 
must  have  been  disastrous.  Whatever  opinion  we  may  be 
inclined  to  hold  as  to  the  active  part  taken  by  the  Southern 
Kingdom,  it  is  clear  that  its  prestige  was  broken,  and  its 
acknowledged  hegemony  among  the  Western  states  brought 
to  an  end.  Henceforth  we  know  it  as  an  isolated  princi- 
pality, "powerless  to  succour  a  friend  or  ward  off  an 
enemy."  Jotham's  separate  reign  lasted  but  two  or  three 
years  at  the  longest  (§  269) ;  then  the  weak  and  vacillat- 
ing Ahaz  (735-715  ?)  followed  the  example  of  the  Northern 
Kingdom  and  threw  itself  into  the  arms  of  the  Assyrians. 

§  309.  Have  we  any  record  or  monument  of  this  dis- 
aster in  the  Hebrew  literature?  The  histories  do  not 
mention  it,  either  directly  or  by  suggestion.  This  in 
itself  would  not  be  very  surprising,  for  they  have  omitted 
many  momentous  matters  otherwise  well  attested.  But 
what  the  histories  leave  unchronicled  is  usually  noticed 
by  the  Prophets,  who  had  a  keener  interest  in  politics  than 
contemporary  annalists  or  later  compilers.  Prophecy, 
however,  makes  no  obvious  allusion  to  this  supposed 
event.  Yet  it  is  possible  that  it  may  have  formed  one  of 
the  occasions  of  the  opening  discourse  of  Isaiah,  "  the  great 
arraignment,"  which  may  then,  after  all,  not  be  out  of 
chronological  order.  Verses  7-9  seem  to  describe  a  press- 
ing national  danger  and  a  serious  loss  of  territory,  and  the 
chapter  has  therefore  been  assigned  by  many  to  the  period 

1  This  seems  to  be  the  best  sense  that;  can  be  made  out  of  the  second 
annalistic  fragment  in  III  R.  9.  For  an  entirely  different  view  of  the 
whole  matter,  see  Note  9  in  the  Appendix. 


CH.  V,  §  310     A  POSSIBLE  MEMORIAL  OF  THE  EVENT  351 

of  Sinacherib's  invasion,  thirty-seven  years  later.  It  is, 
however,  generally  admitted  that  the  situation  pictured 
in  the  passage  in  question  is  more  or  less  idealized;  and 
if  it  is  not  thought  necessary  to  place  it  at  the  very  late 
date  referred  to,  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be 
located  in  the  beginning  of  Isaiah's  prophetic  career,  to 
which  in  all  other  respects  it  is  better  suited.  It  would 
thus  have  been  composed  about  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
Jotham,1  which  followed  quickly  upon  the  death  of  Uzziah. 
We  have,  therefore,  to  look  for  an  historical  situation  such 
as  might  naturally  have  suggested  the  gloomy  diagnosis  of 
Judah's  political  condition  (v.  7,  9)  made  by  the  great 
pathologist  of  the  Jewish  state.  It  may  very  well  have 
been  that  the  isolation  of  Judah  effected  by  the  triumph 
of  Tiglathpileser,  formed  the  basis  of  the  culminating 
thought  contained  in  v.  8:  "And  the  daughter  of  Zion  is 
left  as  a  booth  in  a  vine}Tard,  as  a  lodging-place  in  a 
cucumber  garden,  as  a  beleaguered  city."  The  whole 
passage  should  thus  be  interpreted  as  a  forecast  of  future 
calamities  coloured  by  a  national  misfortune,  whose  results 
were  making  themselves  felt  in  national  depression  and 
impotence.  A  similar  situation  presents  itself  in  ch.  v. 
25,  which  must  be  held  to  be  also,  at  least  partly,  predic- 
tive, and  to  describe  calamities  of  which  the  people  had 
already  had  a  foretaste  in  the  defeat  of  their  army  by  the 
Assyrians,  and  their  exclusion  from  outside  affairs.  The 
isolation  of  Judah  was  seen  to  be  henceforth  complete,  and, 
however  desirable  this  might  be  in  peaceful  and  prosperous 
times  (§  298  f.),  it  was  now  to  be  deplored  as  one  of  the 
symptoms  of  the  disease  that  threatened  to  lead  to  the 
dissolution  of  the  body  politic. 

§  310.  Judah  is  not  mentioned  again  in  the  recovered 
inscriptions  of  Tiglathpileser,  but  the  sister  kingdom  is 
frequently  alluded  to.  The  statements  in  his  annals  next 


1  This  date  is  preferred  by  Driver,  on  different  grounds  ;  see  Isaiah, 
his  Life  and  Times,  p.  19  f .    So  also  Gesenius,  Delitzsch,  and  Dillmann. 


352  MENAHEM  BUYS  A  REPRIEVE  BOOK  VI 

in  order  do  not,  however,  give  all  the  information  we 
need,  even  at  this  earlier  stage  of  contact.  We  are  told 
by  him,  in  the  closing  portion  of  his  report  for  738  B.C., 
that  he  received  the  tribute  of  a  large  number  of  states, 
which  were  in  the  meantime  not  formally  annexed.  They 
range  all  the  way  from  Cappadocia  to  Palestine,  and  in 
the  number  we  find  the  name  of  "Menahem,  king  of 
Samaria."  Among  the  multifarious  operations  of  himself 
and  his  generals,  the  details  of  his  transactions  with  this 
Israelitish  prince  are  omitted;  but  we  can  supply  an 
important  element  in  the  story  from  the  Biblical  record. 
We  read  (2  K.  xv.  19  f.):  "Then  came  Pul,  king  of 
Assyria,  against  the  land,  and  Menahem  gave  to  Pul  a 
thousand  talents  of  silver  that  his  power  might  be  with 
him  to  confirm  the  kingdom  in  his  power.  And  Menahem 
assessed  the  money  upon  Israel,  upon  all  the  freeholders, 
so  that  they  should  give  to  the  king  of  Assyria  each  man 
fifty  shekels  of  silver.  And  the  king  of  Assyria  turned 
back  and  did  not  remain  there  in  the  land."  We  learn 
from  this  what  the  annals  of  the  king  do  not  inform  us, 
that  the  great  invader  made,  at  least,  a  threatening  descent 
upon  the  borders  of  Israel.  In  all  probability  he  had 
intended  to  strike  at  the  whole  north  of  Palestine,  for  his 
annals  mention  the  names  of  "Rezon,  king  of  Damascus," 
and  "Hirom,  king  of  Tyre,"  as  his  tributaries  also,  and 
they  would  seem  to  have  purchased  a  reprieve  in  the  same 
manner  as  Israel  did.  We  get  further  an  illustration  of 
the  process  by  which  the  principalities  within  reach  of 
Assyrian  aggression  were  gradually  reduced,  so  that  their 
ultimate  submission  was  rapidly  accelerated.  The  money 
was  raised  in  this  case  (and  the  same  principle  was  doubt- 
less in  force  in  the  other  threatened  kingdoms)  from  the 
independent  property-owners,  who  were  liable  to  serve  in 
war,  but  whose  service  might  be  commuted  by  a  money 
payment,  as  the  king's  due  in  time  of  need.  The  with- 
drawal of  a  million  and  a  half  of  dollars  from  a  petty 
kingdom  like  Israel,  already  pretty  well  depleted  by  the 


CH.  V,  §  311     CAMPAIGNS  IX  MEDIA  AXD  ARMENIA  353 

ravages  of  domestic  strife,  must  have  brought  it  to  the 
verge  of  exhaustion;  and  this  was  only  the  first  instal- 
ment !  This  amount  of  booty,  so  promptly  acquired,  may 
suggest  to  us  what  an  enormous  treasure  must  have  been 
accumulated  by  the  later  kings  of  Assyria  and  Babylonia, 
in  their  countless  levies  upon  a  host  of  nations  in  the 
richest  portion  of  the  world  (Isa.  xlv.  3). 

§  311.  With  this  invasion  of  the  borders  of  Israel,  and 
the  bargain  made  on  such  favourable  terms  with  King 
Menahem,  the  Great  King  appears  to  have  suspended  for 
a  season  his  operations  in  the  West-land.  The  gains  he 
had  made  in  these  four  years  were  large  and  substantial. 
Besides  the  subjection  and  partial  annexation  of  the  more 
northerly  kingdoms  in  Cilicia  and  Cappadocia,  he  subdued 
and  brought  under  organized  Assyrian  rule  all  of  Northern 
and  Middle  Syria,  and  laid  the  kingdom  of  Damascus,  as 
well  as  Israel  and  the  leading  Phoenician  cities,  under 
heavy  bonds  to  keep  the  Asiatic  peace,  as  the  vassals  of 
Asshur.  He  had  made  a  long  stride  towards  Egypt,  and 
was  soon  to  make  a  much  longer  one.  Affairs  in  the 
East  claimed  his  attention  more  pressingly,  however,  and 
so  we  find  him  for  the  next  three  years  absent  from  the 
Mediterranean  coastland.  In  737  he  describes  himself 
as  busied  with  the  more  thorough  conquest  of  Media, 
which  he  ravaged  from  the  borders  of  Armenia  on  the 
north  to  the  territory  of  Babylonia  on  the  south.  Besides 
fighting,  plundering,  and  ravaging,  he  "annexed  huge 
districts  of  Media  to  the  realm  of  Asshur,"  and  settled 
them  with  colonies  of  prisoners  taken  in  other  wars.1  The 
two  following  years  (736  and  735)  were  chiefly  occupied 
with  a  prolonged  and  determined  enterprise  directed 
against  Armenia.  The  defeat  sustained  by  the  daring 
soldiers  of  this  formidable  rival  in  745  (§  294)  had  pre- 

1  Cb  for  737.  This  notice,  as  given  in  KAT2,  p.  486  (Engl.  tr.  II,  p.  194  f.), 
is  to  be  corrected  to  read  "to  Media"  (a-na  3Iad-ai}.  The  annalistic 
narrative  is  given  in  Lay.  67,  5  ff.,  68,  which  continues  III  R.  9  Xr.  3. 
A  summary  of  the  conquest  is  also  given  in  II  R.  67,  29-42. 

2  A 


354  THE  IMPENDING  DOOM  OF  ISRAEL  BOOK  VI 

vented  any  further  aggression  from  the  north;  but  Tig- 
lathpileser  now  sought  to  make  the  ambitious  kingdom 
forever  innocuous.  The  expedition  culminated,  after 
repeated  defeats  of  the  Armenians  within  their  own 
boundaries,  in  the  investment  of  Turushpa  (the  modern 
Van).  But  as  this  fortress  was,  by  its  situation,  impreg- 
nable, he  was  fain  to  content  himself  with  setting  up  his 
own  statue  before  the  city  gates.  The  annexation  of  large 
districts  westward  to  the  borders  of  Cappadocia,  lately 
under  the  sway  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Lakes,  proved  that 
this  symbol  of  victory  meant  much  more  than  a  temporary 
triumph. 

§  312.  His  hands  were  now  free  to  undertake  the 
complete  subjugation  of  the  West-land,  and  in  734  he 
made  Palestine  itself  the  scene  of  his  operations.  We  get 
our  best  view  of  the  condition  of  the  peoples  of  this  region 
during  the  intervening  three  years  from  the  interpreting 
voice  of  Hebrew  Prophecy.  The  principal  part  of  the 
Book  of  Hosea  (ch.  iv.-xiv.)  was  written  about  this  time, 
and  it  has  mostly  to  do  with  Israel's  moral  and  political 
conduct  during  the  brief  period  of  reprieve  from  Assyrian 
invasion.  To  one  who  reads  it  with  an  open  eye,  it  is 
full  of  allusions  to  that  world-conquering  power  and  its 
control  of  the  destiny  of  Israel.  A  quarter  of  a  century 
had  passed  since  Amos  had  uttered  his  words  of  warning, 
with  a  thinly  veiled  announcement  of  the  revival  of  the 
Assyrian  empire  and  its  consequences  to  the  chosen  people. 
And  Hosea  himself,  in  his  earlier  discourse  (ch.  i.-iii.), 
written  about  748  B.C.,  while  Jeroboam  was  still  alive 
(i.  4),  reiterates  the  prediction  of  Israel's  captivity  in 
more  explicit  language  (iii.  4  f.).  The  watchful  Prophet 
now  saw  that  both  inner  motives  and  motives  extraneous 
to  Israel  were  conspiring  to  bring  on  a  conflict  between 
his  own  country  and  Assyria,  in  which  the  smaller  king- 
dom would  be  shattered  and  destroyed  ;  that  Jehovah  was 
preparing,  for  the  spiritual  and  moral  disaffection  which 
demanded  chastisement,  an  adequate  scourge  in  the  irre- 
sistible army  of  Tiglathpileser. 


CH.  V,  §  314  VAIN  HOPES  FROM  EGYPT  355 

§  313.  We  learn  from  Hosea  (vii.  11 ;  xii.  1 ;  cf .  vii.  8) 
that  there  was  at  least  a  portion  of  his  people  who  looked 
to  Egypt  for  their  deliverance,  and  had  entreated  its 
intervention.  The  fact  that  the  Prophet  refers  so  little 
to  this  diplomatic  movement  is  proof  of  its  subordinate 
importance.  Since  the  unsuccessful  invasion  in  the  time 
of  Asa  (§  215),  Egypt  had  not  intermeddled  in  the  affairs 
of  Palestine.  Who  the  ruling  power  in  Egypt  at  this 
date  was  is  uncertain.  It  was  now  the  closing  period  of 
the  twenty-third  Dynasty,  and  a  king,  named  Zet  by 
Manetho,  but  as  yet  unknown  from  the  monuments,  was 
ruling  in  Tanis  (Zoan).  But  at  Sais  another  dynasty 
(the  twenty-fourth)  was  in  force;  and  the  Ethiopian, 
which  was  soon  to  absorb  them  all  (the  twenty-fifth 
Dynasty),  was  making  itself  felt  as  an  independent  power. 
It  is  evident  from  this  outline  statement  alone,  that  resort 
to  Egypt  was  likely  to  meet  with  but  little  practical 
response;  and,  in  fact,  Hosea  tells  his  people  that  they 
would  become  an  object  of  scorn  to  their  expected  ally 
(vii.  16);  the  refugees  who  should  seek  shelter  there  would 
only  be  adding  a  few  more  graves  to  the  sepulchral 
monuments  of  the  great  necropolis  at  Memphis  (ix.  6). 

§  314.  To  Assyria,  however,  the  country  had  been 
already  mortgaged,  and  the  creditor  was  one  not  apt  to 
restrict  himself  to  what  was  nominated  in  the  bond. 
Hosea  evidently  regards  its  fate  as  already  sealed :  Ephraim 
"is  crushed  in  judgment"  (i.e.  war,  v.  11);  "strangers 
have  devoured  his  strength  "  (vii.  9);  "Israel  is  swallowed 
up;  now  are  they  among  the  nations  as  a  vessel  which 
none  desires"  (viii.  8);  "I  will  send  a  fire  among  his 
cities,  and  it  shall  devour  the  palaces  thereof"  (viii.  14); 
"Ephraim  shall  bring  out  his  children  to  the  slayer"  (ix. 
13) ;  "  all  thy  fortresses  shall  be  spoiled,  as  Shalman  spoiled 
Beth-arbel  in  the  day  of  battle  " l  (x.  14);  "over  night  shall 

1  A  king  of  Moab,  mentioned  by  Tiglathpileser  III  as  one  of  his 
tributaries  (II  R.  67,  60),  bore  the  name  Salamanu,  which  is  exactly  the 
name  before  us.  "  Beth-arbel "  may  represent  Arbela  (the  modern 
Irbid),  east  of  the  Jordan,  near  Pelli.  See  KAT2,  p.  440  ff.  and  cf.  §  337. 


356  FORECASTS   OF   HOSEA  BOOK  VI 

the  king  of  Israel  be  utterly  cut  off  "  (x.  15).  Thus  dis- 
aster and  ruin  are  doubly  linked  with  Assyria ;  it  was  the 
appeal  to  Assyria  that  brought  on  their  present  desperate 
situation,  and  the  end  would  be  that  Assyria  should  root 
them  out  of  their  sacred  land  and  disperse  them  over  its 
wide  domain:  "When  Ephraim  saw  his  sickness  and 
Judah  his  wound,  then  went  Ephraim  unto  Assyria  and 
sent  to  the  Great  King,1  but  he  is  not  able  to  heal  you, 
neither  shall  he  cure  you  of  your  wound "  (v.  13). 
"Ephraim  was  like  a  silly  dove  without  understanding; 
they  called  unto  Egypt,  they  went  unto  Assyria  "  (vii.  11). 
"They  went  up  (i.e.  inland)  to  Assyria  like  a  wild  ass 
(cf.  Ishmael  in  Gen.  xvi.  12)  alone  by  himself"  (viii.  9). 
"  They  shall  not  dwell  (any  longer)  in  Jehovah's  land ;  but 
Ephraim  shall  return  to  Egypt  (as  fugitives),  and  they 
shall  eat  unclean  food  (see  §  299)  in  Assyria"  (ix.  3). 
"They  shall  be  wanderers  among  the  nations"  (ix.  17). 
They  would  be  compelled  not  only  to  forego  their  boasted 
worship  of  Jehovah,  in  strange  lands,  but  would  even  have 
to  renounce  it,  as  the  condition  of  vassalage  to  Assyria: 
"The  inhabitants  of  Samaria  shall  be  in  dismay  for  the 
Calf  (LXX)  of  Beth-aven;  for  her  people  shall  grieve  over 
it,  and  her  priests  shall  shriek  over  it,  because  of  its  glory, 
for  it  is  gone  away  from  her  into  exile.  It,  too,  shall  be 
borne  to  Assyria  as  a  present  to  the  Great  King"  (cf. §  299). 
Of  late  they  had  had  rulers  of  a  certain  kind  in  abundance, 
and  had  secured  at  a  great  sacrifice  the  neutrality  or 
protection  of  Assyria;  but  now  they  were  losing  them 
almost  as  fast  as  they  were  raised  up  (xiii.  10  f . ;  cf.  Zech. 
xi.  8),  and  they  would  soon  be  deprived  not  only  of  allies, 
but  of  both  king  and  nobles  altogether:  "  Yea,  though  they 
hire  (allies)  among  the  nations,  now  will  I  restrain  them, 
au'l  they  will  cease  for  a  little  from  anointing  a  king  and 
princes  (viii.  10,  LXX).  Such  was  the  political  and 
religious  outlook  of  Israel,  according  to  Hosea,  writing 
towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Menahem,  at  a  time  when 

1  See  Note  10  in  Appendix. 


CH.  V,  §  31G  AN   ANONYMOUS   PROPHET  357 

the  futility  of  the  Assyrian  negotiations  was  beginning  to 
be  apparent,  and  the  causes  of  internal  decay,  long  working 
in  the  nation,  were,  to  the  Prophet  at  least,  fast  bringing 
it  to  ruin. 

§  315.  Another  observer,  of  about  the  same  time,  whose 
prophetic  utterances  have  come  down  to  us  in  juxtaposition 
with  the  writings  of  Zechariah  (Zech.  ix.— xi.),  has  also  a 
good  deal  to  say  of  the  revolution  to  be  brought  about  in 
Palestine  and  Syria  through  the  Assyrians.  Belonging  as 
he  did  to  the  Southern  Kingdom,  which  had  not  as  yet 
suffered  direct  invasion,  his  allusions  to  particular  events 
are  less  specific,  and  his  language  being  also  somewhat 
vague  and  symbolical,  interpreters  have  found  it  difficult 
to  agree  as  to  the  date  of  the  Prophecy.1  All  of  the  his- 
torical references,  however,  can  be  explained  from  the 
history  of  these  times.  The  anonymous  Prophet  sees  the 
cities  of  Phoanicia  and  of  the  Philistines  sharing  the  fate 
of  Northern  and  Middle  and  Southern  Syria,  represented 
by  Hadrach,  Hamath,  and  Damascus  (ix.  1-8).  The  oaks 
of  Lebanon  and  the  cedars  of  Bashan  are  laid  low  by  a  sud- 
den desolating  storm  (xi.  1,  2),  and,  as  is  next  described, 
in  language  still  more  figurative,  Ephraim,  in  which 
anarchy  had  so  prevailed  that  three  of  its  rulers  ("shep- 
herds ")  had  been  cut  off  in  one  month  (cf.  2  K.  xv.  13?), 
was  to  be  smitten  in  its  length  and  breadth;  and  the 
alliance  between  Israel  and  Judah,  which  had  been  the 
prophetic  ideal  for  an  invincible  theocratic  kingdom  (x.  6 ; 
cf.  Hos.  i.  11,  E.V.),  should  be  broken  (xi.  3-14),  and  a 
"  frivolous  ruler  "  should  succeed,  who  was  to  devour  the 
substance  of  the  people  (xi.  15-17). 

§  316.  We  shall  now  see  how  the  facts  of  History 
accord  with  the  previsions  of  Prophecy.  In  Israel,  impor- 
tant changes  had  taken  place  between  Tiglathpileser's  two 
great  expeditions  to  the  West.  Menahem  had  died,  appar- 
ently by  a  natural  death,  after  a  brief  reign.  His  son 
Pekahiah  (736-735  B.C.)  found  the  people  still  discon- 

1  See  Note  11  in  Appendix. 


358  A  NEW   RULER  AND   POLICY  IN  ISRAEL        BOOK  VI 

tented,  and,  in  little  over  a  year,  the  general  of  the  army, 
Pekah,  at  the  head  of  a  small  band  of  Gileadites  forming 
a  detachment  of  the  body-guard,  came  upon  him  suddenly 
in  his  own  palace,  and  put  an  end  to  his  life  and  reign. 
The  successor  was,  of  course,  Pekah  (735-733).  He  was 
an  enterprising  ruler,  and  was  firmly  of  the  conviction  that 
a  new  policy  was  needed,  if  Israel  was  to  regain  its  old- 
time  position.  He  felt  that  the  unaccustomed  vissalage, 
under  which  the  state  had  been  brought  by  Menahem, 
should  come  to  an  end  and  the  exhausting  t.  Jbute-paying 
be  stopped.  Damascus  had  then  a  ruler  like-minded  with 
Pekah,  and  the  two  sought  to  form  a  league  among  the 
Western  states  for  defence  against  the  common  despoiler, 
whose  vengeance  they  had  to  expect  as  the  consequence  of 
defiance.  Judah,  now  coming  under  the  influence  of 
Isaiah,  refused  to  join  the  combination,  and  the  northern 
confederates,  who,  in  any  case,  desired  an  opportunity  to 
humble  their  superior,  Judah,  made  common  cause  against 
their  dissident  neighbour,  with  a  view  to  his  complete 
subjugation  (cf.  §  270). 


CHAPTER  VI 

VASSALAGE  OF  JUDAH  AND  THE  PEOPHETIC 
INTERVENTION 

§  317.  As  already  mentioned  (§  270),  the  death  of 
Jotham  (c.  735)  in  early  manhood  left  the  settlement  of 
this  deplorable  strife  to  his  successor,  Ahaz  (735-715?), 
who  came  to  the  throne  a  mere  youth  (Isa.  iii.  4,  12). 
The  reign  of  Ahaz  formed  a  turning-point  in  the  history 
of  Judah  in  more  than  one  way.  Looking  backward  for  a 
moment,  we  see  that  the  reforms  under  Jehoash  (§  254) 
had  given  consistency  and  definiteness  to  the  official 
worship,  as  well  as  to  the  religious  life  of  the  people ;  and 
these  advantages  were  maintained  during  the  three  follow- 
ing reigns,  in  spite  of  the  unsettling  influences'  flowing 
from  the  changing  political  and  social  conditions  (§  296). 
In  the  reigns  of  Uzziah  and  Jotham,  outward  prosperity 
seemed  to  guarantee  the  conservation  of  those  religious 
interests  so  vitally  connected  with  the  development  and 
perpetuation  of  the  theocratic  state ;  but  it  was,  in  reality, 
the  cause  which  contributed  most  largely  to  corruption 
and  degeneracy  in  worship  and  morals. 

§  318.  We  have  the  whole  inner  history  of  the  time  set 
forth  by  one  who  lived  in  it,  and  gave  himself  to  its  study 
and  interpretation  with  matchless  insight  and  energy  of 
soul.  The  critical  three  years  from  the  last  of  Uzziah  to 
the  first  of  Ahaz  formed  the  first  period  of  Isaiah's  pro- 
phetic career,  and  the  subject  of  the  first  section  of  his 
Prophecy.  And  he  has  analyzed  the  temper  and  tendencies 
of  the  Jerusalem  of  that  date  with  such  an  absolute  mastery 

359 


360  THE   IDEAL  AND   THE   REAL   IN   ISAIAH       BOOK  VI 

of  all  the  issues  involved,  that  his  discourses  remain  not 
only  an  unrivalled  piece  of  classic  literature,  but  the  best 
manual  of  the  principles  of  moral  sociology  ever  given  tr 
the  world.  The  arena  was  small  enough,  —  the  capital  o:' 
one  of  the  least  of  the  many  states  that  were,  one  afte" 
another,  most  surely  losing  their  autonomy  and  being 
drawn  into  the  ever-widening  maw  of  Assyria.  But  the 
principles  were  eternal ;  for  Jehovah  had  been  the  Father 
and  the  Founder  of  the  nation.  And  the  issues  were 
infinite ;  for,  by  the  exemplary  doom  of  Judah  and  Jeru- 
salem, pure  worship  and  simple  faith  were  to  be  vindicated 
as  the  essential  and  indispensable  basis  of  righteousness 
and  moral  soundness,  and  these  again  as  the  only  possible 
conditions  of  national  weal  and  endurance.  Such  funda- 
mental axioms  of  Jehovah's  rule  on  earth  were  finally  to 
be  acknowledged  by  all  the  nations  which  should  come 
streaming  to  Jerusalem,  to  be  taught  of  his  ways  and  to 
learn  to  walk  in  his  paths;  for  out  of  Zion  should  go  forth 
his  teaching  and  his  word  from  Jerusalem  (ii.  1-3) ;  his 
arbitration  should  take  the  place  of  war  with  its  desolations 
and  woes,  and  the  light  of  his  countenance  should  approve 
the  universal  peace  and  gladden  the  happy  peoples.  Such 
was  the  ideal,  which  could  be  realized  if  the  house  of 
Judah  would  but  walk  under  such  an  illumining  (ii.  4,  5).1 
But  the  practical  sense  of  this  most  idealistic  of  the  early 
Prophets  forbids  a  long  sojourn  in  this  inspiring  Utopia. 
He  has  to  do  with  Jerusalem  as  it  is,  the  Jerusalem  of 
Uzziah,  Jotham,  and,  alas,  of  Ahaz  (ii.  6  ff.). 

§  319.  It  was  indeed  a  critical  time  for  Judah  and  the 
theocracy,  and  no  one  knew  so  well  as  Isaiah  the  danger 
and  the  consequences  of  an  evil  policy  in  church  and  state. 
Powerful  as  Isaiah  was  —  and  no  subject  of  the  realm  was 
as  influential  as  he,  by  virtue  of  his  social  position,  his 
abilities,  his  claims,  and  his  resolute  faith  —  he  was  ter- 

1  Isa.  ii.  2-5  are,  I  would  suggest,  a  continuation  of  ch.  i.  by  Isaiah 
himself.  Ch.  ii.  1,  an  interruption,  is  an  addition,  apparently,  by  the 
hand  which  wrote  Mic.  i.  1. 


CH.  VI,   §  319     THE   KING  AND   THE   RULING   CLASSES          361 

ribly  crippled  by  his  environment  and  the  character  of  his 
principal  associates.  His  great  practical  aim,  to  secure  a 
reformation  of  worship  and  manners,  which  he  had  con- 
ceived during  the  closing  years  of  the  reign  of  Uzziah,  was 
early  shown  to  be  impracticable  on  a  large  scale,  on  account 
of  the  moral  blindness,  grossness,  and  dulness  of  the  people 
(vi.  9  f.);  and  the  task  must  have  come  to  appear  still 
more  difficult  when  the  brief  reign  of  Jotham  was  followed 
by  the  accession  of  the  unsympathetic,  headstrong,  and 
voluptuous  Ahaz.  How  indispensable  it  was  to  him  to 
secure  the  co-operation  of  the  head  of  the  state,  appears 
from  the  fact  that,  with  marvellous  persistency  and  skill, 
he  succeeded  in  winning  the  confidence,  some  years  later, 
of  the  heir  to  the  throne,  who  has  come  to  be  known  in  his- 
tory as  Hezekiah  the  Reformer.  And  how  he  laboured  to 
lead  Ahaz  himself  into  the  right  course  we  see  illustrated 
in  the  seventh  chapter  of  his  Prophecy.  Ahaz,  however, 
must  not  be  considered  as  standing  alone  in  his  spirit  of 
impiety  and  disregard  of  the  exclusive  claims  of  Jehovah. 
Evil  as  his  reign  was,  rivalling  with  its  impure  worship 
(2  K.  xvi.  4)  and  its  adoption  of  foreign  religious  customs 
(xvi.  10  ff.)  the  worst  of  the  reigns  of  the  northern 
kingdom,  and  even  going  beyond  them  in  the  encourage- 
ment of  cruel  superstition  (xvi.  3),  we  may  well  believe 
that  he  was  head  of  a  large  and  influential  party,  who  were 
only  too  willing  to  follow  him.  It  was,  alas,  true  that, 
even  in  Judah,  a  good  king  had  to  withstand  the  temper 
and  prejudices  of  the  multitude,  while  a  bad  one  found 
support  and  applause  in  any  excess  of  moral  or  religious 
transgression.  Isaiah  himself  has  very  fully  described  the 
character  and  tastes  of  the  ruling  classes  in  and  about 
Jerusalem;  and  the  terrible  picture  of  vice  and  infidelity 
drawn  by  his  contemporary,  Micah,  portrays  not  only  the 
character  of  Israel  alone,  but  that  of  Judah  as  well,  which 
had  made  itself  an  apt  pupil  in  the  school  of  the  House  of 
Omri  (see  i.  5,  9,  13;  vi.  16).  A  few  citations  of 
specific  evils  may  suggest  the  practical  problems  that  con- 


362  DISLOYALTY   TO   JEHOVAH  BOOK  VI 

fronted  these  Prophets,  and  which  Isaiah,  as  one  of  the 
leading  men  of  the  capital,  especially  undertook  to 
solve. 

§  320.  First  of  all,  there  was  the  disloyalty  to  Jehovah, 
manifested  in  idolatry  in  its  various  forms.  In  the  fun- 
damental matter  of  popular  worship  and  practical  belief, 
the  age  of  Ahaz  was  a  critical  one  for  Judah,  mainly  on 
account  of  the  new  political  relations  which  were  estab- 
lished under  this  prince,  and  which,  as  we  have  already 
made  clear,  were  necessarily  to  bring  religious  changes  in 
their  train.  But  even  before  and  at  the  accession  of  Ahaz, 
and  while  his  kingdom  was  not  yet  involved  in  the  larger 
current  of  Asiatic  affairs,  the  religion  of  the  people  was  not 
of  the  simple  unitary  character  which  true  allegiance  to 
Jehovah  would  have  implied.  That  it  had,  on  the  whole, 
remained  free  from  the  grossest  contaminations  of  Canaan- 
itic  worship,  since  the  overthrow  of  the  daughter  of 
Jezebel  (§  254),  is  plain  enough;  and  that  the  possession 
of  the  ancient  national  shrine  and  its  legitimate  priesthood, 
along  with  more  favourable  geographical  and  social  condi- 
tions, tended  to  conserve  a  purer  form  of  religion  than  was 
cultivated  in  the  north,  is  equally  certain  (§  271  ff.). 
But  it  is  clear,  upon  the  explicit  testimony  of  contemporary 
Prophets,  that  the  popular  professed  worship  of  Jehovah 
was  often  sadly  mixed  with  the  adoration  of  false  gods,  in 
addition  to  the  cultus  of  the  "high  places,"  which  the 
historical  books  repeatedly  mention  (1  K.  xiv.  23;  xv.  14; 
xxii.  43;  2  K.  xii.  3;  xiv.  4;  xv.  4;  xvi.  4;  2  Chr.  xx. 
33;  xxi.  11;  xxviii.  3;  xxxiii.  3).  The  "lies"  which 
Amos  says  caused  the  Juda3ans  to  err  (ii.  4)  can  only  refer 
to  false  gods  (cf.  Ps.  xl.  5).  The  accusations  of  Hosea 
are  more  frequent,  though  not  always  more  explicit.  He 
evidently  regards  Judah  as  being  in  less  hopeless  case, 
both  in  religion  and  morals,  than  his  own  nation  (i.  7 ;  iv. 
15) ;  and  yet,  when  he  makes  an  arraignment  of  the  latter, 
he  usually  gives  a  side-glance  of  pity  or  indignation  at  the 
former  (see  v.  5,  10,  12  ff. ;  vi.  4,  11,  where  the  middle  of 


CH.  VI,  §  321  SORCERY  AND  IDOLATRY  363 

the  verse  should  end  the  chapter;  viii.  14;  xii.  2),  and 
also  accuses  it  directly  of  inconstancy  to  Jehovah  (xi.  12). 
§  321.  It  is  Isaiah  and  Micah,  however,  who  first  plainly 
state  the  case,  and  their  words  reveal  the  true  nature  of 
Judah's  religious  practice,  both  for  their  own  time  and  for 
the  century  preceding.  Their  charge  of  idolatry  is  sweep- 
ing and  direct;  and  in  the  true  spirit  of  the  reformer  they 
deal  with  it  in  connection  with  those  moral  delinquencies 
of  their  people  which  they  so  unsparingly  denounce.  Not 
only  was  superstition  rife,  in  the  form  of  sorcery  and 
magic,  imported  both  from  the  East  and  from  the  West 
(Isa.  ii.  6;  cf.  iii.  2  f.,  and  especially  viii.  19;  Mic.  iii.  6, 
7,  11 ;  v.  12),  but  the  worship  of  false  gods  was  so  preva- 
lent that  the  land  was  said  to  be  full  of  idols  made,  as 
both  Prophets  remark  with  biting  scorn,  by  the  hands  of 
their  worshippers  (Isa.  ii.  8;  cf.  ii.  18,  20;  xvii.  8;  xxx. 
22;  xxxi.  7;  Mic.  v.  13).  It  is  true  that,  while  direct 
allusions  to  idols  are  plain  and  strong,  they  are  not  of 
frequent  occurrence  in  these  Prophets ;  but  the  very  fact 
that  they  are  mentioned  incidentally  and  as  a  matter  of 
course  is  the  surest  evidence  possible  that  the  evil  was 
deep-seated  and  wide-spread,  and  that  the  people  as  a 
whole  were  to  the  manner  born.  Indeed,  it  will  be  found 
that  much  of  the  moral  iniquity  of  the  time,  which  is  cited 
with  such  detail,  is  connected  with  false  worship  of  one 
form  or  another,  and  even  with  the  most  noxious  and 
odious  type  of  idolatry.  By  this  I  mean  that  nature- 
worship  which  in  practice  became  throughout  the  Semitic 
world  a  system  of  immorality  legalized  and  fostered  under 
the  name  of  devotion  to  the  goddess  of  lust.  The  Canaan- 
itic  form  of  this  bestializing  cult  developed  itself  chiefly 
in  the  rites  of  Ashera  (§  152).  The  favourite  symbol  of 
this  goddess,  tantamount  to  an  "idol,"  was  a  tree,  and  her 
worship  was  chiefly  carried  on  in  groves,  or  other  places 
where  the  rich  luxuriance  of  the  vegetable  world  suggested 
the  attributes  of  Astarte,  the  Semitic  Venus.  The  encour- 
agement of  these  indulgences,  under  the  name  of  religion, 


364  IDOLATRY   AND   SEXUAL   VICE  BOOK  VI 

constituted  the  chief  evil  against  which  the  Prophets  and 
religious  reformers  in  Israel  had  to  contend  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  the  national  life,  —  an  evil  so 
essentially  pernicious,  so  virulent  in  its  persistence  and 
seductiveness,  that  it  was  only  eradicated  through  a  com- 
plete social  and  political  transformation  of  the  community. 
It  will  be  at  once  seen  how  readily  the  various  forms  of 
false  worship,  with  which  the  Old  Testament  has  made  us 
familiar,  how  everything  which  was  not  of  the  pure 
spiritual  worship  of  Jehovah,  became  tributary  to  this 
all-consuming  moral  and  physical  vice.  Secondary  forms 
of  self-indulgence,  often  disguised  as  religious  consecra- 
tion, ministered  to  this  ruling  passion,  as  the  minor 
currents  are  diverted  into  the  main  stream  that  is  drawn 
from  afar  towards  the  vortex.  The  adoration  of  Jehovah 
himself  upon  the  high  places  held  sacred  by  immemorial 
tradition  —  a  custom  which  had  not  yet  been  put  down 
either  in  the  Northern  or  in  the  Southern  Kingdom  — 
ministered  inevitabty  to  the  grosser  rites  of  Ashera,  through 
the  very  proximity  of  these  heights  to  the  terebinth  groves 
and  gardens,  which  were  preferred  to  the  temple  of  Jehovah 
(Isa.  i.  29).  And  when  we  find  sun-images  (Isa.  xvii.  8; 
xxvii.  9;  cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  30;  Ezek.  vi.  4,  6;  and  especially 
2  Chr.  xiv.  4;  xxxiv.  4,  7)  coupled  with  the  symbols  of 
Ashera,  we  are  led  to  conclude  that  other  popular  forms  of 
worship  were  ancillary  to  the  same  class  of  indulgences. 
This  becomes  all  the  clearer  to  us  when  we  remember  that 
such  images  were  representations  of  Baal,  the  old  sun-god, 
who  was  to  all  the  Western  Semites  the  original  type  of 
reproduction,  kindred  to  that  represented  by  Astarte,  of 
whom  he  was  the  male  counterpart.  So  we  find  that 
not  only  these  special  symbols  of  Baal,  placed  upon  his 
altars  (2  Chr.  xxxiv.  4),  but  the  more  common  "pillars" 
(marg.  of  Rev.  Eng.  vers. :  "obelisk")  came  to  be  dedi- 
cated to  the  same  god  (2  K.  iii.  2;  x.  26  f.),  and  are,  in 
like  manner,  associated  with  the  images  of  Ashera  (2  K. 
xviii.  4;  xxiii.  14;  Mic.  v.  12  f.).  And,  finally,  we  see 


CH.  VI,  §  322      RESULTS  IN  THE   NATIONAL  LIFE  365 

in  several  of  the  passages  just  cited  both  types  of  Baal- 
worship  associated  and  co-ordinated  with  the  "  high  places. " 
Thus  the  whole  of  the  religious  services  that  were  not 
rendered  spiritually  to  the  invisible,  inimitable,  inexpres- 
sible Jehovah,  were  so  many  avenues  and  entrances  to  the 
"house  which  is  the  way  to  Sheol,  going  down  to  the 
chambers  of  death"  (Prov.  vii.  26,  27). 

§  322.  All  this  was  regarded  as  un-Israelitish  by  the 
Prophets  of  Israel  and  Judah.  It  did  not  characterize 
properly  the  people  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of  purity  and 
holiness.  This  view  of  the  perpetual  danger  of  contami- 
nation from  vices  essentially  foreign,  explains  to  us,  in 
large  measure,  the  intense  desire  on  the  part  of  these 
representatives  of  Jehovah  that  the  people  whom  they 
served,  as  guides  and  counsellors,  should  be  kept  aloof 
from  foreign  entanglements  and  influences  of  every  sort. 
They  understood  this  sin  and  its  consequences  thor- 
oughly, as  leading  to  manifold  other  vices,  which  they 
scourged  also  with  extreme  severity,  and  as  corrupting 
and  undermining  the  community  generally.  If  there  is 
anything  in  the  writings  of  the  great  Prophets  of  ancient 
Israel  which  entitles  them  to  the  distinction  of  moral 
sociologists,  it  is  their  profound  perception  and  conviction 
of  the  destructiveness  of  this  worst  of  all  moral  plagues, 
of  the  ruin  which  it  surely  works  to  the  family,  the  com- 
munity, and  the  state  itself.  How  history,  ancient  and 
modern  alike,  has  borne  out  the  correctness  of  their  diag- 
nosis of  this  private  and  public  ulceration,  need  not  here 
be  said.  It  is  only  necessary  to  point  out  further  in 
this  special  connection  how  Isaiah  emphasizes  (iii.  16  ff.) 
the  frivolity  of  the  women  of  Jerusalem.  His  descrip- 
tion suggests  plainly  enough  his  dread  of  the  wholesale 
depreciation  of  Israelitish  motherhood  and  conjugal  fidel- 
ity; and  ife  is  not  difficult  to  see  how  cheaply  these  virtues 
would  como  to  be  held  if  the  vices  which  he  connects  with 
popular  mDcIss  of  worship  were  tolerated  in  the  land  of 
Jehovah. 


366  OTHER  VICES  AND   FOREIGN  RELATIONS    BOOK  VI 

§  323.  As  already  indicated,  these  and  kindred  iniqui- 
ties were  undoubtedly  more  prevalent  in  the  Northern  than 
in  the  Southern  Kingdom ;  and  probably,  even  in  the  time 
of  Ahaz,  the  latter  did  not  reach  the  degree  of  offensive- 
ness  which  could  often  be  predicated  of  the  former.  It  was 
largely  a  question  of  environment,  as  the  Prophets  well 
knew.  Enough  has  been  said,  however,  to  show  how  far 
Judah  had  gone  in  this  direction,  and  to  explain  and 
vindicate  the  attitude  of  contemporary  Prophets  towards 
those  foreign  states  where  such  things  were  practised 
without  shame  or  self-reproach.  Of  the  other  offences 
stigmatized  so  memorably  in  the  surviving  prophetic 
literature,  the  most  dangerous,  because  the  most  natural, 
so  to  speak,  and  the  most  easily  encouraged,  were  greed 
and  its  concomitant,  deceit.  Here,  too,  we  have  to  note 
and  admire  the  monumental  worth  of  the  characterizations 
of  these  vices  made  by  the  Prophets.  And  again,  if  we 
take  these  sins  by  themselves,  or  add  to  them  the  other 
evils  with  which  the  land  was  infested,  calling  forth  the 
indignation  and  the  grief  of  the  servants  of  Jehovah,  we 
can  readily  see  how  closer  relations  with  foreigners  would 
increase  the  dreaded  evils  and  aggravate  the  offence.  On 
this  special  point  it  is  not  necessary  to  enlarge ;  it  will  be 
sufficient  to  apply  to  each  case  in  detail  the  general  prin- 
ciples already  enunciated  (§  271,  296  ff.). 

§  324.  One  additional  remark  may  be  permitted  in 
conclusion.  It  has  often  struck  the  modern  reader  as  a 
peculiarity  of  most  of  the  Prophets  that  they  had  a  penchant 
for  dealing  with  the  affairs  of  foreign  nations,  which  they 
make  the  subject  of  minute  study  in  their  political,  moral, 
and  religious  features  (e.g.  Isa.  xiii.  ff. ;  Jer.  xlvii.  ff. ; 
Ezek.  xxv.  ff. ;  xxxv. ;  xxxviii.  f . ;  Amos  i.  f . ;  Obadiah; 
Xahum;  Zeph.  ii. ;  Zech.  ix. ;  Daniel).  A  review  of  the 
moral  and  religious  issues  involved  in  the  relations 
between  these  foreign  powers  and  Israel  or  Judah  goes  far 
to  explain  the  phenomenon. 

§  325.    Returning  to  our  point  of  departure,  we  observe 


CH.  VI,  §  326      THE  ALLIES   BEFORE   JERUSALEM  367 

that  the  policy  favoured  by  Isaiah  towards  Assyria  was 
necessarily  that  of  quiescence  and  trust  in  Jehovah,  as  far 
as  the  question  of  most  pressing  moment  was  concerned. 
It  was  the  true  theocratic  policy,  precisely  the  same  as  that 
recommended  to  the  Northern  Kingdom  by  Hosea  (§  313  f.). 
Would  the  ruling  powers  in  Judah  accept  the  saving 
counsel?  Let  us  look  now  more  closely  at  the  actual 
situation.  The  forces  of  Judah  were  unable  to  cope  with 
the  allies  in  the  field.  A  succession  of  reverses  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  5  ff.)  compelled  them  to  retire  to  the  fortress  of 
the  capital.  After  the  confederates  had  ravaged  the 
Judsean  country  north  of  and  round  about  Jerusalem,  a 
section,  perhaps  the  main  portion  of  the  Aramaeans, 
marched  southward,  joined  the  Edomites,  with  whom  they 
took  possession  of  Elath,  that  old  bone  of  contention  be- 
tween Judah  and  Edom,  whose  capture  and  retention  by 
Uzziah  had  contributed  largely  to  make  the  reign  of  that 
great  ruler  and  his  successor  one  of  commercial  as  well  as 
military  success  (§  269).  This  severe  blow  having  been 
struck  at  the  prosperity  of  Judah,  the  united  armies  pre- 
pared to  move  on  Jerusalem  itself;  and  the  heart  of  the 
royal  household  "  quivered  as  the  trees  of  the  forest  quiver 
before  the  wind"  (Isa.  vii.  1  ff. ;  2  K.  xvi.  5  f.).  The 
Philistines  also  took  advantage  of  the  distressed  condition 
of  Judah,  and  succeeded  in  recovering  a  number  of  border 
towns  and  districts  which  Uzziah  had  annexed  (2  Chr. 
xxviii.  18;  cf.  Isa.  ix.  12). 1 

§  326.  In  this  extremity  of  dismay  and  terror,  Ahaz,  in 
a  panic,  sent  messengers  to  Tiglathpileser  imploring  his 
intervention,  and  offering  to  become  his  vassal  as  the  price 
of  his  deliverance  (2  K.  xvi.  7;  2  Chr.  xxviii.  16).  That 
he  deliberately  threw  away  the  independence  of  his  country 
is  plain  from  his  own  words:  "I  am  thy  slave  and  thy 
son";  the  former  term  indicating  his  readiness  to  pay 


1  I  regard  it  as  certain,  with  Ewald  and  many  followers,  that  the 
passage,  Isa.  ix.  8-x.  4,  belongs  properly  between  vs.  25  and  26  of  ch.  v. 


368  THE   DILEMMA   OF   AHAZ  BOOK  VI 

regular  tribute  and  render  all  necessary  service  in  war  or 
peace ;  and  the  latter  symbolizing  the  homage,  honour,  and 
obedience  (cf.  Mai.  i.  6)  which  he  was  willing  to  manifest 
to  his  liege  lord.  Did  he  do  so  wisely  or  unwisely,  as  a 
necessary  evil,  or  unnecessarily?  The  small  but  compact 
and  well-led  party  in  Jerusalem,  which  was  maintained  by 
Isaiah,  evidently  held  the  latter  view.  Before  any  agree- 
ment could  be  made,  and  probably  before  the  message  was 
sent  to  the  Assyrian  king,  Ahaz  was  one  day  inspecting 
the  arrangements  for  preserving  the  water  supply  of  the 
city,  in  view  of  the  impending  siege.1  Isaiah  went  out  to 
impress  upon  him  the  propriety  of  leaving  the  Assyrians 
out  of  his  plans,  and  trusting  in  Jehovah  for  deliverance. 
In  this  counsel  the  Prophet  had  first  of  all  in  view  the 
necessity  of  keeping  his  nation  free  from  foreign  corrupting 
influences ;  but  he  also  perceived  clearly  that  the  dreaded 
alliance  between  Damascus  and  Ephraim  would  soon  be 
dissolved  at  any  rate,  by  the  intervention  of  the  Assyrians 
against  their  enterprising  vassals,  and  that  their  destruc- 
tion was  only  a  matter  of  time.  They  were  to  him,  in 
fact,  merely  the  smouldering  ends  of  half-burnt  firebrands ; 
their  spite  against  Judah  would  wreak  itself  in  smoke, 
instead  of  fire.  He  then  distinctly  announced  the  impend- 
ing collapse  of  the  whole  enterprise,  including  the  scheme 
of  putting  a  Syrian  (an  otherwise  unknown  "son  of 
Tabel ")  upon  the  throne  of  Judah.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  continued  existence  of  "  the  house  of  David  "  would 
depend  upon  their  trust  in  Jehovah,  who  was  the  head  of 
Jerusalem  the  capital  of  his  own  land,  as  contrasted  with 
those  who  ruled  in  the  capitals  of  the  apostate  Ephraimites 
and  the  heathen  Aramaeans.  As  to  the  policy  they  were 
to  adopt,  all  he  could  -commend  to  them  was  to  "  be  watch- 
ful and  remain  passive  "  (vii.  4-9). 

§  327.  To  encourage  the  weakling  who  sat  on  the 
throne  of  David,  Isaiah  proposed  that  he  should  demand  a 
sign  from  Jehovah  of  any  character  he  might  choose,  as  a 

1  See  the  illustrative  sketches  in  Stade,  GVI.  I,  590  ff. 


CH.  VI,  §  328          A  PREDICTION  AND  A  SIGN  369 

test  of  the  reliability  of  the  promise  of  deliverance. 
Ahaz,  who  was  bent  upon  calling  in  Assyrian  relief,  made 
answer,  partly  in  superstitious  dread  and  partly  in  depre- 
catory cunning,  that  he  would  not  tempt  Jehovah  by  asking 
for  such  a  test.  The  Prophet  then  gave  a  more  explicit 
prediction,  which  was  to  have  a  twofold  application  and 
fulfilment ;  the  land  was  to  be  evacuated  by  the  invaders, 
so  that  the  impending  evil  would  be  averted ;  but  it  would 
itself  be  finally  scourged  and  devastated,  by  the  very  power 
to  which  its  rulers  were  now  looking  for  deliverance. 
Thus  the  policy  which  Ahaz  and  his  party  intended  to 
adopt  would  defeat  its  own  ends,  and  hasten  the  catastrophe 
which  it  sought  to  avert.  As  an  omen  which  should  be 
valid  to  all  who  would  hear  the  word,  it  was  announced 
that  a  child  should  soon  be  born,  to  whom  the  significant 
name  "  God  is  with  us  "  should  be  given.  The  parentage 
of  the  child  is,  very  remarkably,  not  mentioned ;  only  the 
mother  is  referred  to,  and  that  not  by  name,  since  it  is 
merely  said  that  a  certain  "young  woman"  should  in  a 
very  short  time  become  the  mother  of  this  promised 
Immanu'el.1  Of  this  child  it  is  affirmed  that,  at  some 
time  after  he  should  be  able  to  choose  between  good  and 
evil,  the  privations  and  desolation  of  the  land  would  have 
become  so  great  that  his  food  might  consist  of  curds  and 
honey,  the  diet  of  a  people  to  whom  agriculture  would  be 
rare  and  difficult.  Before  that  time  should  arrive,  the 
respite  of  deliverance  from  the  present  invasion  by 
Ephraim  and  Syria  would  be  granted  (vii.  13-16). 

§  328.  In  this  announcement,  the  temporary  reprieve 
from  calamity  is  mentioned  as  a  subordinate  fact,  and,  as 
it  were,  casually,  not  even  the  instrument  of  the  deliver- 
ance being  named.  And  it  was  just  this  momentary  relief 
which  the  court  party  were  willing  to  sacrifice  everything 
to  secure.  So  convinced  was  the  Prophet  of  the  utter 
futility  of  the  whole  scheme  of  an  Assyrian  alliance,  and 
of  the  evils  that  must  certainly  follow  in  its  train,  that  the 

1  See  Note  12  iu  Appendix.  2  u 


370  A   SUCCESSION   OF   OMENS  BOOK  VI 

resulting  relief  appeared  to  him  as  only  a  brief  and  insig- 
nificant episode  in  the  tragic  history  of  Judah's  decline. 
It  should  serve  rather  to  point  a  contrast  with  the  woes 
that  were  impending,  than  to  furnish  a  pretext  for  a  com- 
forting word,  or  even  a  suggestion  or  symbol  of  the  greater 
deliverance  which  his  people  and  country  were  yet  to  enjoy, 
and  of  which  his  heart  and  imagination  were  full  to  over- 
flowing. These  successive  omens,  and  their  exposition  by 
the  seer  himself,  show  more  clearly  than  anything  else  the 
political  insight  of  this  greatest  of  Israelitish  statesmen, 
the  range  of  his  survey  of  the  forces  that  were  so  rapidly 
making  up  the  history  of  the  time,  his  invincible  and  he- 
roic faith,  his  single-hearted  patriotism,  and  the  purity  and 
grandeur  of  his  practical  aims.  Over  against  this  magnifi- 
cent picture  is  thrown  out  in  gloomy  relief  the  character  and 
conduct  of  the  opposing  party,  who  had  lost  faith,  courage, 
and  self-control,  through  lack  of  loyalty  to  Jehovah. 

§  329.  The  portent  of  "Immanuel"  was  too  large  and 
far-reaching  to  stand  for  this  single  catastrophe.  It  was 
rather  a  comprehensive  type,  to  which  Isaiah  would  need 
again  and  again  to  recur  when  he  could  cut  himself  loose 
from  the  pressing  problems  of  the  present;  for  these  seemed 
only  to  lead  to  an  entanglement  of  hopeless  disorder,  and 
to  culminate  in  an  impenetrable  gloom  of  darkness  and 
distress  (cf.  viii.  22).  To  make  vivid  and  impressive  the 
reality  and  character  of  these  nearer  events,  a  new  "sign  " 
was  given,  and  that  after  a  very  brief  interval  of  time  (cf. 
viii.  4  with  yii.  16).  One  of  the  Prophet's  children,  soon 
to  be  born,  was  to  be  called  by  the  expressive  name, 
"  Hasten  spoil !  hurry  prey !  "  Of  his  earliest  days,  also, 
it  is  intimated  that  they  should  be  contemporaneous  with 
the  conquest  and  spoiling  of  Damascus  and  Ephraim,  and 
that,  too,  at  the  hands  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  who  is  now 
named  for  the  first  time  as  the  agent  of  their  overthrow 
and  of  consequent  relief  to  Jerusalem  (viii.  1-4).  With 
mingled  regret  and  reproach,  he  addresses  the  recreant 
northern  branch  of  the  old  family  and  Israel.  He  chides 


CH.  VI,  §  330     DOOM   OF   ISRAEL   AND   DAMASCUS  371 

them  for  disdaining  "Siloah's  brook  that  flowed  fast  by 
the  oracles  of  God,"  —  the  little  stream  whose  waters,  flow- 
ing ever  gently  and  serenely  under  the  protection  of  the 
hills  of  Zion,  were  a  symbol  of  the  calm  confidence  which 
trust  in,  and  allegiance  to,  Jehovah  would  inspire,  — 
and  rebukes  them  for  welcoming  as  leaders  Pekah  and 
Rezon.  He  declares  that  another  stream  shall  come  upon 
them,  the  Great  River  in  its  flood-time,  rising  up  out  of 
its  accustomed  channels  and  overflowing  its  banks.  The 
inundation  would  submerge  all  the  western  lands,  and 
even  "sweep  onward  into  Judah,"  its  furthest  spreading 
waves  reaching  as  far  as  the  remotest  corners  of  the 
land  (viii.  5-8). 

§  330.  The  judgment  to  be  inflicted  upon  Israel  and 
Syria  has  thus  a  secondary  place  in  this  series  of  prophecies 
connected  with  the  "signs  ";  the  Prophet,  while  concerned 
even  to  bitter  grief  for  the  fate  of  the  unfaithful  sister 
kingdom,  looks  over  and  beyond  it  to  the  issues  which  were 
at  stake  in  his  own  little  realm,  on  which  depended  the 
future  pure  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  the  very  existence  of 
his  earthly  dwelling-place.  But  he  did  utter  a  special 
prophecy,  at  this  crisis,  against  Damascus  and  Samaria, 
declaring  that,  leagued  as  they  were  in  an  unholy  war, 
they  should  be  linked  together  also  in  common  defeat  and 
mourning,  with  the  loss  of  their  fortresses  and  their 
nationality  (xvii.  1-4).  In  language  no  less  pathetic 
than  beautiful,  he  predicts  the  taking  off  of  the  defenders 
of  Samaria,  by  the  harvestman's  strokes  of  the  sword  of 
the  Assyrians,  leaving  a  very  small  remnant  "  as  when  one 
gleaneth  ears  in  the  valley  of  Rephaim."  And  his  oracle 
turns  at  last  into  a  wail  for  the  delusion  and  the  baffled 
hopes  of  the  votaries  of  Ashera  and  Adonis,  who,  in  their 
desperation,  should  abandon  their  fallacious  deities,  and 
recognize  their  Maker,  the  Holy  One  of  Israel,  but  too 
late  to  bring  them  in  any  other  harvest  than  that  which 
was  sure  to  come  from  the  transplanting  of  foreign  growths 
into  Jehovah's  land  (xvii.  5-11). 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  ASSYKIANS   IN  PALESTINE  AND   BABYLONIA 

§  331.  AT  the  time  when  Ahaz  of  Judah  sent  his 
message  of  personal  and  national  humiliation  to  Tiglath- 
pileser,  the  latter  was  probably  already  well  on  his  way 
down  the  western  coast.  His  aims,  in  this  second  expedi- 
tion to  the  West,  were  to  settle  the  affairs  of  the  newly 
colonized  districts  of  Syria  (§  294,  306),  as  well  as  to 
extend  his  conquests  southward  to  Egypt,  the  unvarying 
goal  of  Assyrian  warlike  adventure.  His  story  of  the 
present  enterprise,  —  one  of  the  most  important  in  the 
annals  of  his  reign, — as  far  as  may  be  made  out  from 
the  fragmentary  records,  is  as  follows : 1  In  734  he  set  out 
upon  an  expedition,  of  which  the  objective  point  was 
southwestern  Palestine.  His  first  care  on  arriving  in 
the  West-land  was  to  see  to  the  security  of  the  region 
annexed  in  738,  which  had  belonged  to  the  realm  of 
Hamath.  Over  these  he  reasserted  his  sovereignty  and 
appointed  six  military  administrators.  He  then  proceeded 
down  the  coast,  annexing  and  organizing  all  the  districts 
along  the  "Upper  Sea"  (§  179).  No  mention  is  made  of 
Tyre  and  Sidon,  but,  as  we  shall  see  later,  they  were  not 
left  out  of  mind.  Arriving  at  the  natural  turning-point 
above  Mount  Carmel,  he  enters  the  valley  of  Jezreel,  and 
lays  waste  all  the  Israelitish  country  to  the  west  of  the 
Sea  of  Kinnereth,  and  annexes  it  formally  to  the  realm  of 
Asshur.  This  important  information  we  do  not  get  from 
the  Inscriptions  alone,  which  are  here  incomplete  in  details, 

1  See  Note  13  in  Appendix. 
372 


CH.  VII,  §  332      TIGLATHPILESER   IN   PALESTINE  373 

as  well  as  mutilated.  The  Biblical  record  (2  K.  xv.  29) 
states  that  "in  the  days  of  Pekah  king  of  Israel  Tiglath- 
pileser  king  of  Assyria  came  and  took  Ijon  and  Abel- 
beth-maracha  and  Janoah  and  Kedesh  and  Hazor  [and 
Gilead]  and  Galilee,  all  the  land  of  Naphtali,  and  carried 
them  captive  to  Assyria."  The  official  Ninevite  report 
speaks  of  localities  which  may  possibly  be  identified  with 
some  of  the  above-named  districts.  Their  position,  at  any 
rate,  is  fixed  by  him,  and  puts  it  beyond  doubt  that  the 
same  tracts  of  country  are  meant  in  both  accounts.  He 
says  they  lay  at  the  entrance  to  "Omri-land,"  or  Israel. 
A  glance  at  the  map  shows  how  well  this  describes  the 
region  indicated  by  the  Biblical  writer,  bordering  upon 
the  immemorial  caravan  routes  from  Egypt  and  the  coast 
to  Damascus  and  the  Euphrates,  and  the  road  by  which, 
innumerable  times,  hostile  armies  had  marched  from  both 
east  and  west  to  the  centre  of  Palestine.  Tiglathpileser 
says  he  annexed  the  whole  of  this  region  to  Assyria,  and 
placed  over  it  his  officers  as  governors. 

§  332.  He  then  follows  the  coast-route  southward, 
receives  the  tribute  and  submission  of  MetintI,  king  of 
Askalon  (cf .  §  334),  and,  apparently  without  making  further 
delay,  marches  upon  the  extreme  frontier  town,  Gaza, 
whose  possession  brings  him  at  once  almost  within  strik- 
ing distance  of  the  land  of  the  Pharaohs.  Chanun,  the 
king  of  Gaza,  flees  into  Egypt.  Here,  on  the  border,  the 
Assyrian  monarch  erects  his  own  statue  as  the  symbol  of 
his  sovereignty,  indicating  at  once  that  all  Palestine  was 
under  his  control,  and  that  there  no  foreign  rival  should 
dare  dispute  his  sway.  There  is  nothing  said  as  to  other 
Philistian  communities,  and  this  I  take  to  be  a  significant 
corroboration  of  the  view  that  they  were  then  dependent 
upon  Judah  (§  268),  and  therefore  under  the  protection 
of  the  Assyrians.  Having  thus  secured  the  frontiers  of 
Southern  Palestine,  he  was  at  liberty  to  deal  with  the 
obnoxious  allied  rulers  of  the  northern  states,  without 
fear  that  they  would  be  able  to  get  assistance  from  Egypt. 


374  SUBJECTION   OF   SAMARIA  BOOK  VI 

Pekah  was  the  first  to  feel  his  power.  The  blow  he 
inflicted  was  a  terrible  one,  the  worst  which  Israel  had 
known  since  the  days  of  Egyptian  bondage.  The  remnant 
of  the  land  south  of  "the  entrance  to  Israel,"  that  is, 
" Ephraim  "  or  "  Samaria,"  was  devastated,  a  portion  of  the 
people  deported  to  Assyria,  and  the  valiant  rebel  and 
conspirator,  Pekah,  put  to  death.  Hoshea  (733-724)  was 
made  ruler  over  the  new  kingdom,  and  the  royal  treasure 
was  transported  to  Assyria.1  Here  again  the  Biblical 
narrative  furnishes  the  needed  complement  to  the  story  of 
the  inscriptions.  It  says,  in  a  passage  immediately  fol- 
lowing the  last  quotation  (2  K.  xv.  30),  that  "Hoshea 
the  son  of  Elah  made  a  conspiracy  against  Pekah  the  son 
of  Remaliah,  and  smote  him,  and  slew  him,  and  reigned 
in  his  stead."  It  is -proper,  therefore,  to  assume  that 
Hoshea  was  a  pretender  to  the  throne,  who  had  favoured, 
and  perhaps  joined,  the  invaders,  and  with  their  counte- 
nance put  his  old  master  to  death,  to  reign  as  their  vassal 
over  the  moiety  of  the  dismembered  state. 

§  333.  It  is  extremely  difficult  to  trace  the  exact 
succession  of  the  remaining  events  of  this  two  years' 
campaign,  as  the  chief  details  are  given  to  us  by  synoptical 
and  not  by  annalistic  inscriptions.  The  Eponym  chronicle 
makes  the  main  enterprise  against  Damascus,  the  leading 
member  of  the  confederacy,  to  have  begun  in  733,  and  as 
we  cannot  suppose  that  the  Great  King  allowed  Rezon,  by 
respite  of  time,  the  opportunity  of  making  trouble  for  him 
among  any  other  of  the  independent  principalities,  we 
have  to  assume  that  the  army,  which,  after  the  capture  of 
Ga'za,  completed  the  humiliation  and  overthrow  of  Israel, 
also  acted  as  a  check  upon  Syria,  and  that  a  detachment  of 
the  force  remained  on  the  borders  of  Damascus  during  the 
military  actions  following  that  catastrophe. 

§  334.  The  next  active  movement  seems  to  have  been 
directed  against  Arabia.  Here  a  large  and  powerful  tribe 
of  Bedawin,  half  nomads,  half  traders,  were  attacked  and 

1  See  again  Note  13  in  the  Appendix. 


CH.  VII,  §  334  CAMPAIGN   IN  ARABIA  375 

plundered.  As  was  customary  among  the  ancient  Arab 
communities  of  the  north,  like  Sheba  in  the  south  of  the 
peninsula,  the  supreme  government  was  entrusted  to  a 
woman.  The  queen  of  this  nation  was  named  Samsi 
("Belonging  to  the  Sun").  His  ground  of  action  appar- 
ently was  that  she  was  intriguing  with  Askalon  against 
Assyria;  but  the  invasion  had  a  much  larger  political 
motive.  Arabia  was  important  to  the  Assyrians  as  the 
principal  depot  of  spices  and  incense,  besides  being  a  breed- 
ing-ground for  camels  and  cattle,  and  a  source  of  supply 
for  gold  and  precious  stones.  The  tribes  which  furnished 
these  valuable  possessions,  whether  as  controlling  their 
production,  their  supply,  or  their  transportation,  must  be 
brought  under  Assyrian  influence,  especially  as  it  had  been 
the  prescriptive  immemorial  role  of  Egypt  to  regulate  the 
traffic  to  the  east  of  the  Isthmus,  and  to  divert  to  herself 
the  richest  and  most  precious  wares.  Whatever  would 
curb  or  cripple  Egypt  was  a  clear  gain  in  the  protracted 
struggle  for  the  empire  of  the  world.  Hence  the  rigorous 
treatment  accorded  to  the  Arab  queen,  who  was  suddenly 
assailed  by  an  army  of  strangers,  and  compelled  for  freedom 
and  honour  to  seek  refuge  in  her  desert  home.  An 
enormous  spoil  of  camels,  cattle,  and  bales  of  spices  of 
various  sorts,  was  obtained  through  this  assault.  The 
luckless  queen  was  pursued  far  into  her  wilderness  retreat, 
and  compelled  to  accept  the  control  of  an  Assyrian  prefect. 
A  powerful  tribe,  the  Idiba'il  (Idibi'il),  the  "Adbeel"  of 
Gen.  xxv.  13,  whose  habitat  stretched  from  the  Dead  Sea 
southwest  to  the  Isthmus,1  and  who  were  probably  in 
league  with  the  people  of  Judah,  and  therefore  more 
reliable  allies,  were  appointed  to  guard  the  frontiers  of 
Egypt.  The  peoples  of  other  regions  of  Arabia  brought 
propitiatory  gifts.  Among  these  we  may  at  least  name 
Tema  and  Saba'a,  which  will  be  recognized  as  familiar 
Bible  names,  the  latter  being  identified  with  the  Sabaeans 
of  Job  i.  15  (cf.  Gen.  x.  7;  xxv.  3),  and  the  former 

1  See  Par.  p.  301  f. 


376  CAPTURE   OF  DAMASCUS  BOOK  VI 

distinguished  as  traders  along  with  the  Sabaeans  (Job  vi. 
19).  It  is  very  probable  that  these  Sabseans  were  con- 
nected with  the  famous  peoples  inhabiting  the  country  of 
the  same  name  in  Southern  Arabia  ("Sheba").1 

§  335.  The  most  formidable  task  of  the  whole  yet 
remained  to  be  accomplished,  — the  capture  of  Damascus. 
As  already  mentioned,  the  Eponym  chronicle  designates 
that  region  as  the  goal  of  the  campaign  of  733.  But  it 
holds  the  same  prominent  place  in  the  record  for  732,  and 
this  is  the  strongest  proof  we  have  of  the  importance  of 
the  enterprise  in  the  mind  of  the  Assyrian  monarch. 
What  we  have  of  his  report  gives,  however,  an  inadequate 
idea  of  the  operations.  He  describes  a  battle  between  his 
forces  and  those  of  Damascus,  which  must  have  taken 
place  in  733.  It  resulted  in  the  total  overthrow  of  the 
Syrians,  whose  king,  Rezon,  was  compelled  to  flee  "  like  a 
hunted  stag,  into  the  city  through  its  principal  gate." 
Here  Tiglathpileser  "shut  him  up  like  a  caged  bird." 
He  then  proceeded  to  devastate  all  the  territory  subject  to 
Damascus.  In  the  way  of  exemplary  punishment,  as  well 
as  embittered  revenge,  the  rich  and  stately  groves  of  well- 
watered  Damascus  were  ruthlessly  hewn  down,  even  to  the 
last  tree.  A  fortress,  with  the  ancestral  residence,  the 
birthplace  of  Rezon,  was  captured,  and  its  defenders  made 
prisoners.  Other  fortified  cities  were  also  taken,  and 
altogether  over  five  hundred  towns  and  villages  in  the 
sixteen  districts  of  Damascene  territory  were  laid  waste, 
and  made  "like  mounds  in  the  track  of  a  deluge."  Such 
was  the  treatment  accorded  to  Damascus,  the  hereditary 
opposer  of  Assyrian  aggression  and  the  head  of  the  Syro- 
Ephraimitish  league.  Of  the  taking  of  the  main  fortress 
itself  we  are  not  informed  in  the  extant  inscriptions.2 

1  For  the  operations  in  North  Arabia,  see  III  R.  10,  30-38,  to  which 
must  be  added  the  synoptical  statements  in  II  R.  67,  52-55,  and  Lay.  66, 
1-16,  along  with  Lay.  73,  16,  and  its  continuation  in  Lay.  29,  Nr.  2. 

2  The  only  account  we  have  of  the  war  against  Damascus  is  contained 
in  Lay.  72;  73.     The  reference  to  Rezon,  its  king,  in  Lay.  29,  Nr.  2,  is  too 


CH.  VII,  §  337  AN  IMPERIAL   FUNCTION  377 

But  that  Damascus  was  really  captured,  we  learn  from  the 
Biblical  narrative  of  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  which  again  comes 
in  as  an  essential  complement  to  the  Assyrian  record. 
The  account  (2  K.  xvi.  5  ff.)  is  only  a  summary  of  the 
principal  events  that  determined  the  fortunes  of  Judah, 
and  its  mention  of  the  fall  of  Damascus  (v.  9),  in  connec- 
tion with  the  appeal  of  Ahaz  for  relief  to  the  Assyrian 
king  (§  326),  is  not  to  be  taken  as  indicating  the  exact 
place  in  order  of  time  of  the  crowning  deed  of  this  long 
campaign. 

§  336.  After  the  occupation  of  the  city,  which  was 
followed  by  the  deportation  of  a  large  number  of  citizens 
to  Kir,  the  victorious  monarch  held  high  court  in  this 
ancient  Aramaean  capital,  whose  history,  commercial  impor- 
tance, and  geographical  position  made  it  the  most  fitting 
place  for  an  imperial  levee.  At  this  august  function  he 
received  in  person  the  princes  of  the  subject  states. 
Among  those  who  appeared  was  Ahaz  of  Judah 1  (2  K.  xvi. 
10),  who  had  secured  his  protection  at  so  great  a  sacrifice 
of  treasure,  of  dignity,  and  of  his  country's  weal.  The 
Great  King  mentions  Ahaz  among  the  number  of  those 
whose  tribute  and  gifts  were  paid  to  him  as  the  profit  of 
this  western  expedition,  and  the  Biblical  narrator  tells  us 
the  nature  of  the  fee  ("TITtf)  with  which  he  had  retained 
the  services  of  such  a  puissant  defender;  namely,  "the sil- 
ver and  the  gold  which  were  found  in  the  House  of  Jehovah 
and  in  the  king's  own  house."  This  was  doubtless  fol- 
lowed by  an  annual  payment,  so  that  the  position  of 
Judah,  with  regard  to  Assyria,  soon  became  little  different 
from  that  of  the  generality  of  tributary  states,  whose 
contributions  to  the  treasury  of  the  Great  King  were  the 
result  of  one  form  or  another  of  military  coercion. 

§  337.    In  the  list  of  new  tributaries  2  there  also  appear 

mutilated  to  be  made  out  clearly.  For  a  conjecture,  see  Smith,  AD.  p.  284 ; 
Hommel,  GBA.  p.  668. 

1  Ya-n-ha-zi  mat  Ya-u-da-ai  (II  R.  67,  61). 

-'  UK.  (57,  57-03. 


378  COMPLETION   OF    WESTERN   WARS  BOOK  VI 

the  names  of  the  king  of  Ammon  (Sanibu1),  of  Moab 
(Salamanu2),  and  of  Edom  (Kausmalak3).  Whether  the 
territory  of  these  princes  was  actually  invaded  by  Assyrian 
troops  we  cannot  tell  with  certainty.  Edom  would  natur- 
ally be  overawed  during  the  Arabian  campaign,  and  it  is 
likely  also  that  Moab  and  Ammon  were  visited,  or  at  least 
threatened,  during  the  long  war  against  Damascus.  Gilead 
(see  above)  would  then  certainly  have  been  overrun,  and, 
being  the  territory  of  a  rebel,  would  share  the  fate  of  the 
other  outlying  possessions  of  Samaria. 

§  338.  To  complete  the  subjection  of  the  West-land, 
there  remained  only  the  leading  states  of  Phoenicia.  The 
Assyrian  king,  knowing  well  the  temper  of  the  Phoenicians, 
had  concluded,  on  his  southerly  march,  that  it  would 
not  be  worth  while  to  sacrifice  time  and  fighting-men 
against  a  city  like  Tyre,  which  would  be  sure,  without 
coercion,  to  find  it  profitable,  and  therefore  expedient,  to 
own  his  authority  and  send  him  a  fitting  contribution. 
Accordingly,  at  the  close,  as  it  would  seem,  of  his  opera- 
tions in  Palestine,  he  sent  thither  a  military  and  civil 
officer  of  the  highest  rank,  to  demand  tribute.  The  moral 
pressure  thus  exerted  seems  to  have  been  tolerably  strong, 
as  the  enormous  sum  of  150  talents  of  gold,  with  an 
unknown  quantity  of  other  treasure,  was  paid  over  to  the 
exacting  claimant.4  The  submission  of  the  northerly 
kingdom  of  Tubal  (§  217),  in  Cappadocia,  was  secured, 
probably  about  the  same  time,  in  a  similar  fashion,  and 
was  accompanied  by  the  payment  of  an  impost,  in  which 
the  great  proportion  of  silver  (1000  talents)  strikingly 
illustrates  the  mineral  riches  of  the  country.5 

1  See  Par.  294. 

2  Salamanu  is  the  same  name  as  Solomon  (cf.  §  314). 

3  Ka'usmalak  (Ka-us-ma-la-ka)  of  Edom  means  "  the  Bow  of  Molech  "  ; 
cf.  Kusayahu,  "the  Bow  of  Jehovah"  of  Chr.  xv.  17,  and  the  modern 
Syriac  kistlmaran,   "rainbow,"  i.e.  "the  bow  of  our  Lord."     Names 
connected  with  the  bow  were  common  in  Edom,  as  might  be  expected 
(Gen.  xxv.  27  ;  xxvii.  3  ;  cf.  xxi.  20). 

4  II  R.  67,  66.  5  II  R.  67,  64  f. 


CH.  VII,  §  340          CAMPAIGNS   IN  BABYLONIA  379 

§  339.  The  Great  King  now  left  Palestine  and  Syria, 
not  to  return  in  person.  His  last  military  achievements 
were  performed  in  Babylonia.  Here  lived  the  most  stub- 
born of  his  adversaries,  whose  subjugation  he  had  begun, 
but  not  completed,  in  an  earlier  period  of  his  reign 
(§  293).  His  former  operations  were  confined,  as  above 
shown,  to  securing  his  own  boundary,  and  to  the  expul- 
sion from  Northern  Babylonia  of  turbulent  elements. 
His  rapid  excursions  against  the  Aramaean  and  Chaldaean 
principalities  of  the  south  were  not  followed  up  by  a 
permanent  occupation.  Now,  as  the  closing  work  of  his 
reign,  he  undertook  a  systematic  subjection  of  the  whole 
of  Babylonia.  The  main  part  of  these  conquests  were 
achieved  in  731.  The  king's  first  care  was  to  make  a 
triumphal  entry  into  the  principal  cities  of  Northern  and 
Central  Babylonia,  and  thus  renew  his  federation  with 
the  priests  of  the  national  shrines,  whose  protection  was 
indispensable  to  his  success  in  the  land  of  their  votaries. 
The  nomadic  Aramaeans  of  the  Lower  Tigris,  and  the 
fierce  Chaldseans  bordering  on  the  Gulf,  were,  however,  the 
foes  with  whom  he  had  to  reckon.  The  former,  who,  in 
numerous  and  powerful  clans,  ranged  the  country  up  and 
down  the  River,  and  who,  after  each  reverse  of  fortune, 
were  continually  recruited  from  their  roving  brethren  of 
the  pasture  lands  on  the  Middle  Euphrates,  had  entrenched 
themselves  most  strongly  east  of  the  Tigris,  their  two 
principal  tribes  being  those  that  lay  between  that  river  and 
the  lowest  portion  of  the  Uknu  (the  classical  Choaspes,  now 
the  Kercha,  §  106).  The  northerly  encampments  belonged 
to  the  Pukudu  ("  Pekod  "  of  Jer.  1.  21 ;  Ezek.  xxiii.  23), 
and  the  southerly  to  the  Q-ambulu.  The  Pukud  territory 
was  invaded,  the  settlements  broken  up,  and  the  people 
driven  to  the  borders  of  Elam.  With  this  chastisement 
the  Aramaeans  were  at  least  terrorized  for  the  present. 

§  340.  A  much  more  dangerous  foe  were  the  Chaldaeans, 
lying  between  the  Lower  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  and  stretch- 
ing northward  from  the  Gulf  as  far  as  they  could  assert 


380  SUBMISSION   OF   THE    CHALDEANS  BOOK  VI 

their  power  (§  223,  293).  During  Tiglathpileser's  occu- 
pation with  his  western  and  northern  wars  they  had 
become  so  successful  that  one  of  their  chiefs,  Ukinzir, 
attained  to  the  throne  of  Babylonia,  with  his  seat  in  the 
city  of  Babylon  itself.  To  subdue  this  Chalclsean  leader, 
and  thereby  to  establish  an  exclusive  Assyrian  primacy  in 
Babylonia,  was,  after  all,  the  great  object  of  the  whole 
campaign.  Accordingly,  the  notice  for  731  in  the  Eponym 
lists  tells  us  that  the  expedition  was  directed  against  his 
capital,  Shapiya.  This  city,  whose  position  cannot  now 
be  indicated  with  certainty,  made  a  resistance  worthy  of 
the  historic  Chaldsean  name,  so  that  the  Great  King,  having 
failed  to  enter  the  walls,  was  moved  to  revenge  himself  by 
cutting  down,  as  he  had  done  at  Damascus  (§  335),  the 
groves  of  palm-trees  which  surrounded  it.  Other  cities 
of  the  same  principality  were  taken  and  destroyed,  and  all 
the  leading  communities  of  the  Chaldseans  were  either 
subdued  or  voluntarily  surrendered  themselves.  The 
former  class  were  treated  as  rebels  and  deported  to  Assyr- 
ian territory.  Among  the  latter  may  be  mentioned  the 
ruler  of  Blt-Ydkin,  Merodach-Baladan  (Marduk-pal-iddin  : 
"Merodach  has  given  a  son''),  described  in  the  records  as 
"  the  king  of  the  Sea,  who,  among  the  kings,  my  prede- 
cessors, to  no  former  king  had  come  or  kissed  their  feet." 
This  chieftain,  known  to  us  later  from  the  Bible,  and  made 
still  more  illustrious  by  the  cuneiform  annals,  was  then 
but  a  youth,  and  thought  it  best,  in  the  meantime,  to 
propitiate  the  redoubtable  conqueror  of  Western  Asia  by 
coming  before  him  and  proffering  his  allegiance.1 

§  341.  Contenting  himself  with  these  achievements, 
and  desirous  of  spending  the  remaining  years  of  his  life 
in  peace  at  home,  Tiglathpileser  now  ceased  from  his  wars. 
In  729  he  again  visited  Babylonia,  to  receive  the  formal 
consecration  as  the  vice-regent  of  Bel.2  After  the  custom 

1  For  the  campaign  in  Babylonia,  see  II  R.  67  (the  chief  synoptical 
inscription),  1 3-2  8 . 

-  Ch  for  729  :  "  The  kin?  takes  the  hands  of  Bel." 


CH.  VII,  §  341     LAST   YEARS   OF   TIGLATHPILESER  381 

of  his  predecessors,  he  spent  his  closing  years  in  archi- 
tectural and  other  enterprises  for  the  beautifying  and 
strengthening  of  his  residence,  Kalach,  as  well  as  of 
Nineveh.  In  the  latter  city  he  erected  a  palace  at  the 
bend  of  the  river  Choser,  and  in  the  former  he  rebuilt  the 
palace  of  Shalmaneser  II  (the  so-called  "  Central  Palace  "), 
in  the  style  of  Syrian  architecture.  The  walls  of  this 
structure  he  inscribed  with  annals  of  his  reign.  Both  the 
building  itself,  and  the  inscriptions,  met  with  a  curious 
fate.  Esarhaddon,  the  fourth  in  succession,  in  seeking 
materials  for  his  great "  Southwest  Palace,"  availed  himself 
of  the  then  somewhat  dilapidated  edifice,  and  transported 
the  stones  to  the  site  of  his  new  structure.  The  original 
usurpation  of  the  throne  by  the  great  founder  of  the  New 
Assyrian  empire,  so  strangely  resented  by  the  descendant 
of  another  irregular  claimant  (§358),  had  thus  the  effect  of 
abridging  and  mutilating  the  record  of  his  achievements, 
though  it  could  not  hide  them  from  the  admiration  of  later 
ages,  or  diminish  the  never-ending  influence  of  the  most 
original  and  far-seeing  of  all  the  rulers  of  Assyria. 


CHAPTER   VIII 


§  342.  TIGLATHPILESEE,  III  died  in  the  month  Tebet, 
727.  The  heir  to  his  throne,  with  its  new  and  vast 
responsibilities,  was  Shalmaneser  IV 1  (727-722),  pre- 
sumably his  son.  His  reign  was  not  devoid  of  important 
events,  but  unfortunately  none  of  his  annals  have  so 
far  come  to  light,  while,  to  add  to  our  embarrassment, 
the  Eponym  notices  for  these  years  are  almost  entirely 
destroyed.  It  is,  therefore,  fortunate,  that  here  the  Bible 
narrative  is  full  and  specific,  more  so,  at  least,  than  in 
almost  any  other  portion  of  Assyrio-Israelitish  history.  A 
little  help,  also,  comes  to  us  from  the  Babylonian  chronicle. 
We  shall  have  to  make  out  our  sketch  of  this  brief  reign 
under  the  disadvantage  of  scanty  material,  and  it  will 
not  be  possible  to  gain  certitude  as  to  all  the  events,  or 
as  to  their  order. 

§  343.  The  Book  of  Kings  has  a  twofold  reference  to 
Shalmaneser  IV,  the  only  monarch  of  that  name  who  is 
mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  first  notice  (2  K. 
xvii.  1-6)  is  given  in  connection  with  the  reign  of  Hoshea 
of  Samaria,  and  runs  as  follows,  after  indicating  the  time 
of  his  accession,  the  length  of  his  reign,  and  his  character: 
"  (3)  Against  him  came  up  Shalmaneser  king  of  Assyria; 
and  Hoshea  became  his  vassal  and  rendered  him  tribute. 
(4)  And  the  king  of  Assyria  discovered  treason  in  Hoshea, 
in  that  he  had  sent  messengers  to  Seve  the  king  of  Egypt 2 

1  Bab.  Chr.  I,  23-28.  -  See  Note  14  in  Appendix. 

382 


CH.  VIII,  §  344  THE  BIBLICAL   ACCOUNT  383 

and  did  not  send  up  tribute  to  the  king  of  Assyria,  as  in 
year  upon  year,  and  the  king  of  Assyria  shut  him  up  and 
bound  him  in  prison.  (5)  And  the  king  of  Assyria  went 
up  through  the  whole  land,  and  went  up  to  Samaria,  and 
laid  siege  to  it  three  years.  (6)  In  the  ninth  year  of 
Hoshea  the  king  of  Assyria  took  Samaria,  and  exiled 
Israel  to  Assyria,  and  settled  them  in  Halah,  and  Habor, 
on  the  river  of  Gozan,  and  in  the  cities  of  Media."  The 
other  account  (2  K.  xviii.  9-11)  is  given  in  the  narrative 
of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah  of  Judah:  "(9)  And  it  came  to 
pass  in  the  fourth  year  of  King  Hezekiah,  that  was  the 
seventh  year  of  Hoshea  son  of  Elah  king  of  Israel,  there 
came  up  Shalmaneser  king  of  Assyria  against  Samaria, 
and  laid  siege  to  it.  (10)  And  they  took  it  at  the  end  of 
three  years:  in  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah,  that  is  the 
ninth  year  of  Hoshea  king  of  Israel,  Samaria  was  taken. 
(11)  And  the  king  of  Assyria  exiled  Israel  to  Assyria  and 
deported  them  to  Halah,  and  Habor  the  river  of  Gozan,  and 
the  cities  of  Media."  It  is  obvious  that  the  second  notice 
adds  nothing  to  the  information  contained  in  the  first, 
except  the  synchronisms  with  the  reign  of  Hezekiah. 
There  are  some  difficulties  to  be  cleared  up  in  connection 
with  the  numbers  given  in  the  two  passages;  but  of 
these  later  on. 

§  344.  To  appreciate  the  historical  situation,  we  need 
to  go  back  a  short  period.  According  to  our  sketch  of  the 
operations  of  Tiglathpileser  in  Palestine,  where  733  was 
given  (§  332)  as  the  probable  date  of  the  death  of  Pekah, 
Hoshea  had  been  six  years  upon  the  throne  of  Samaria  at 
the  accession  of  Shalmaneser.  As  the  creature  of  Tiglath- 
pileser, he  was  bound  as  much  by  gratitude  as  by  prudence 
to  remain  faithful  in  his  allegiance  to  his  redoubtable 
overlord.  And  so  he  did  abide,  at  least  till  the  demise  of 
the  latter  gave  him  a  change  of  masters.  But  the  death 
of  the  tyrant  alone  was  no  sufficient  motive  to  revolt.  As 
we  know,  all  the  nationalities  submitted  with  intense 
reluctance  to  the  Assyrian  yoke.  Even  after  the  drastic 


384  THE   KEVOLT  ACCOUNTED  FOR  BOOK  VI 

means  of  suppression  employed  on  a  large  scale  by  Tiglath- 
pileser,  the  accession  of  a  new  monarch  long  continued  to 
be  regularly  the  signal  for  a  general  revolt  of  the  subject 
states.  But  the  subjugation  of  the  West-land  had  been 
undertaken  by  the  founder  of  the  new  empire  with  the  best 
prospects  of  permanent  success ;  and  here  it  must  have 
been  expected  that  the  disunited  and  shattered  peoples 
would,  out  of  sheer  exhaustion  and  weariness,  acquiesce 
in  the  dominion  of  the  conqueror.  Least  of  all  would  it 
have  been  supposed  that  Israel,  with  the  most  productive 
portion  of  its  ancient  soil  administered  by  Assyrian  pre- 
fects, and  only  the  petty  district  about  Samaria  allowed  to 
preserve  the  name  of  a  kingdom  by  the  precarious  suffer- 
ance of  the  Assyrian  monarch,  should  take  the  lead  in  any 
movement  towards  insurrection.  The  threefold  depletion, 
of  territory,  of  citizens,  and  of  wealth,  followed  by  the 
exaction  of  tribute  from  the  impoverished  and  dispirited 
residue,  would  have  seemed  to  render  any  kind  of  resist- 
ance an  act  of  madness.  It  was  a  change  of  outward  and 
not  of  inward  conditions  that  appeared  to  promise  success 
to  a  well-concerted  uprising,  on  the  accession  of  a  new 
Assyrian  king.  That  change  consisted  in  the  new  Asiatic 
policy  adopted  by  the  revived  Egyptian  nationality,  —  a 
policy  Avhich,  in  its  interaction  with  the  aggressive  move- 
ments of  the  empires  on  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates,  condi- 
tioned, more  than  all  other  external  causes,  the  tragic 
fortunes  of  Israel  and  Judah  (cf.  §  313). 

§  345.  Our  last  occasion  for  direct  allusion  to  the  affairs 
and  politics  of  Egypt  was  the  invasion  of  Southern  Pales- 
tine by  Shishak,  the  first  monarch  of  the  twenty-second 
Dynasty,  in  the  reign  of  Rehoboam  of  Judah  (§  210). 
Decisive  changes  had  taken  place  in  the  empire  of  the 
Nile  during  the  two  intervening  centuries.  Shishak,  and 
the  dynasty  which  he  founded,  were  of  the  Libyan  race, 
which  had  gradually  established  itself  in  the  Delta  by 
successive  immigrations.  The  Libyans  had  long  been 
employed  in  great  numbers  as  mercenary  soldiers,  and 


CH.  VIII,  §  346     RESUME   OF   EGYPTIAN   AFFAIRS  385 

many  of  them  were  advanced  to  high  commands.  In  the 
growing  weakness  of  the  Theban  rulers,  they  had  found 
their  opportunity  to  use  their  military  authority  as  a 
stepping-stone  to  high  positions  in  the  state.  "When 
Shishak,  who  had  been  military  ruler  of  Bubastis,  came  to 
secure  power,  upon  the  crumbling  ruins  of  the  priestly 
dynasty  of  Thebes,  he  set  himself  seriously  to  counteract 
the  corruption  and  manifold  abuses  which  had  been  toler- 
ated and  promoted  by  his  predecessors.  But  the  genius 
for  organization  and  centralization  was  lacking  in  these 
children  of  the  desert.  The  history  of  their  rule,  as  far  as 
it  can  be  gathered  from  their  monuments,  continues  the 
story  of  national  decline,  ending  in  the  complete  disinte- 
gration of  the  empire.  One  local  ruler  after  another  set 
up  and  maintained  his  authority  over  his  own  district, 
sometimes  without  opposition,  sometimes  in  successful 
rebellion  against  the  nominal  heir  of  the  Pharaohs.  Thus 
it  came  to  pass,  that  when,  after  a  century  and  a  half  of 
Libyan  domination,  under  nine  titular  kings,  the  country 
yielded  to  a  new  foreign  regime,  there  were  no  less  than 
twenty  princes,  virtually  independent,  bearing  sway  in 
Egypt  proper. 

§  346.  The  new  controlling  force  in  Egypt  came  this 
time  also  from  the  outside,  but  from  a  people  altogether 
dissimilar  to  the  Libyans.  Ethiopia  had  been  for  more 
than  twelve  centuries  under  the  control  of  Egypt,  which  had 
enriched  and  aggrandized  herself  immeasurably  through  its 
gold,  its  rich  tropical  productions,  and,  more  than  all,  by 
its  slave-labour.  The  great  princes  of  the  twelfth  Dynasty, 
above  all,  Usertesen  III  (c.  2000  B.C.),  subdued  the  north- 
ern portion  of  Nubia,  and  annexed  the  Nile  Valley,  from 
the  First  Cataract  at  Assouan  to  the  Second  Cataract  above 
Wady  Haifa.  During  the  troublous  times  of  the  Hyksos, 
the  Ethiopians  not  only  refused  allegiance,  but  made 
themselves  a  terror  to  the  people  of  the  Lower  Nile  by 
frequent  depredations.  It  was  the  renowned  monarch, 
Aahmes  I  (§  144),  the  expeller  of  the  Hyksos,  and  the 

2  c 


386  RISE   OF   THE   ETHIOPIANS  BOOK  VI 

first  king  of  the  eighteenth  Dynasty  (c.  1580),  who  also 
reconquered  Nubia ;  and  his  immediate  successors  extended 
the  Egyptian  dominion  as  far  as  the  Third  Cataract  (Island 
of  Argo).  Thothmes  I  took  the  decisive  step  of  organiz- 
ing this  whole  territory,  of  three  hundred  miles  in  length, 
as  a  province  of  the  empire,  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
governors  and  a  governor-general,  "the  Prince  of  Kush." 
Fortresses  were  constructed,  temples  and  palaces  erected, 
and  the  local  institutions  assimilated  to  those  of  the 
conquering  people.  The  incorporation  with  Egypt  lasted 
five  centuries,  and  ended  in  the  political  independence  of 
the  subjugated  territory,  which  had  now  extended  south- 
ward to  the  great  bend  of  the  Nile  at  the  18th  parallel  of 
latitude.  Yet  "  through  association  with  Egypt  the  culture 
of  that  country  had  established  itself  firmly  in  Ethiopia. 
Egyptian  was  the  official  language,  the  writing  was  hiero- 
glyphic, and  the  titles  of  the  sovereign  were  imitations  of 
those  of  the  Pharaohs.  Above  all,  the  Egyptian  religion, 
and  especially  the  Theban  worship  of  Amon,  attained  to 
complete  predominance  in  the  land  of  Kush."1 

§  347.  As  the  disintegration  of  Egypt  proper  under  the 
Libyan  regime  went  on,  as  above  described,  it  became  easy 
for  the  rulers  of  Ethiopia,  who,  during  the  twenty-second 
Dynasty  had  exchanged  vice-royalty  for  actual  as  well  as 
titular  royalty,  to  gain  for  themselves  a  footing  in  the 
territory  of  the  ancient  lords  of  the  land.  This  was  all 
the  easier,  because  Thebes  and  the  surrounding  country 
was  now  entirely  disassociated  from  the  nominal  Pharaohs. 
The  new  kingdom  of  Ethiopia,  which  was  coming  to  domi- 
nate the  whole  valley  of  the  Nile,  had  for  its  capital 
Napata,  the  most  southerly  city  in  Egyptian  Nubia,  at  the 
foot  of  the  Jebel  Barkal.  The  position  of  this  chief  city 
is  significant  of  the  original  seat  of  Ethiopian  indepen- 
dence, remote  from  the  influence  of  the  Pharaohs,  and  near 
the  sources  which  were  continually  replenishing  the  anti- 
Egyptian  element  of  the  population.  Early  in  the  eighth 

1  Meyer,  GA.  §  350. 


CH.  VIII,  §  348        THE   ETHIOPIAN   CONQUEST  387 

century  the  new  kingdom  was  ready  to  intervene  in  the 
affairs  of  the  confused  and  distracted  principalities  of  the 
Lower  Nile-land.  This  was  done  by  Pianchi,  king  of 
Ethiopia,  about  775.  In  what  form  his  claims  were  first 
put  forward  is  riot  clear,  but  we  know  that  his  suzerainty 
was  only  acknowledged  after  a  most  determined  resistance 
on  the  part  of  the  princes  of  the  Delta  and  the  Fayum. 
These  were  not  overcome  till  several  battles  had  been 
fought,  both  on  river  and  land,  and  more  than  one  city 
taken  by  storm,  among  these  being  even  Memphis,  the 
most  sacred  of  all  cities  in  the  eyes  of  Egyptians.  Pianchi 
showed  the  genius  of  a  far-sighted  statesman,  as  well  as  of 
a  conqueror,  in  restraining  himself  from  asserting  a  claim 
to  rule  in  the  seat  of  the  Pharaohs.  He  was  content  to 
receive  the  homage  of  the  disunited  princes,  being  only 
watchful  against  all  attempts  at  combination  for  the  over- 
throw of  his  suzerainty.  That  any  of  the  leading  princes 
succeeded  in  maintaining  more  than  very  brief  independ- 
ence is  not  probable.  On  the  other  hand,  that  no  Ethiopian 
ruler  is  reckoned  among  the  historic  Pharaohs  until  the 
twenty-fifth  Dynasty  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact 
that  no  sovereign  of  that  country  undertook  the  actual 
administration  of  Egypt  before  that  epoch.  The  twenty- 
third  Dynasty  is  named  after  princes  who  ruled  in  the 
Delta,  and  is  reckoned  from  c.  800  to  735  B.C.  The 
twenty-fourth  consisted  of  but  one  king,  who  enjoyed  in 
Memphis  a  short  reign  (734-728),  which  was  put  an  end 
to  because  of  his  persistent  attempts  to  ignore  the  authority 
of  the  kings  of  Ethiopia.  This  prince,  Bekenrenf  by 
name,  the  Bocchoris  of  the  Greeks,  was  deposed  and  put 
to  death  by  Shabaka  of  Ethiopia,  a  grandson  of  Pianchi, 
who  now  asserted  and  maintained  the  direct  control  of  the 
united  realms  of  all  Egypt  and  Ethiopia. 

§  348.  The  accession  of  the  twenty-fifth,  or  Ethiopian 
Dynasty  (728-663),  brings  us  very  close  to  the  time  of 
Shalmaneser  IV  of  Assyria  and  Hoshea  of  Israel.  Vast 
designs  were  now  cherished  by  the  Pharaohs  of  the  south- 


388  EGYPTIAN   DESIGNS   IN   ASIA  BOOK  VI 

ern  race.  No  less  an  enterprise  was  conceived  than  the 
re-establishment  of  Egyptian  influence  in  Western  Asia,  as 
it  had  been  maintained  in  the  glorious  days  of  Thothmes  III 
and  Ramses  II.  The  practical  motives  of  this  ambitious 
project  are.  not  difficult  to  surmise.  It  was  becoming 
evident  to  the  Egyptians  that  the  gradual  but  sure  advance 
of  the  Assyrians,  in  the  conquest  of  Syria,  Palestine,  and 
North  Arabia,  was  not  meant  to  be  confined  to  Asia  alone, 
but  would,  from  the  newly  acquired  vantage-ground,  be 
pushed  onward  to  the  west  of  the  Isthmus.  An  assertion 
of  their  interest  in  Palestine  was  therefore  an  instinctive 
movement  for  self-preservation  on  the  part  of  the  dwellers 
on  the  Nile.  Again,  the  Ethiopian  kings  of  Egypt  knew 
that  nothing  could  so  strongly  cement  the  disintegrated 
states  of  Egypt  with  one  another,  and  with  their  new 
masters  from  the  south,  as  action  in  a  common  cause 
against  the  great  common  foe  of  the  nations.  And  nothing 
could  so  well  prove  the  value  of  union  and  cohesion  as  the 
dread  of  national  obliteration  by  the  piecemeal  absorption 
of  disorganized  and  disunited  states.  Hence  the  encour- 
agement to  aggressive  action  in  Palestine  given  by  the 
Ethiopian  overlords  to  the  princes  of  the  Delta.  But  both 
the  motive  and  the  action  came  too  late  to  curb  the  dreaded 
Assyrians,  or  even  to  save  Egypt.  Indeed,  the  evils  which 
had  brought  about  the  paralysis  of  national  life  —  local 
jealousies  and  strife,  the  rivalry  of  sectional  religions, 
official  corruption,  and,  above  all,  the  greed  and  arrogance 
of  the  priestly  class  —  prevented  Egypt,  in  spite  of  her 
ambitions  and  intrigues,  from  making  any  figure  at  all  in 
Asia  for  the  next  hundred  years  and  more.  It  actually  led 
to  her  becoming  a  source  of  weakness  and  danger  to  the 
Asiatic  states  which  she  chose  as  her  allies.  At  the  very 
outset  Shabaka  was  crippled  by  the  want  of  subordination, 
us  well  as  the  want  of  harmony  among  his  Egyptian  sub- 
jects. Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  the  ancient  renown  of 
Egypt,  and  the  imposing  vastness  of  the  new  monarchy, 
lent  a  seductive  glamour  to  her  proffered  alliance  with  the 


CH.  VIII,  §  349    HOSHEA'S  INTRIGUES  AND   SUBMISSION        389 

petty  states  of  Palestine,  and  to  her  unfailing  promises  of 
protection  and  succour.  Thus  it  was  the  alluring  prospect 
of  Egyptian  aid  that  encouraged  Hoshea,  and  other  princes 
of  Syria  and  Palestine,  to  break  with  Assyria,  on  the 
death  of  their  conqueror  (cf.  §  343  f.). 

§  349.  Shalmaneser  showed  himself  fully  alive  to  the 
situation.  It  seems,  in  fact,  that  an  Assyrian  army  was 
operating  in  Northern  Syria  at  his  accession,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  keeping  watch  over  the  West-land  generally. 
The  Babylonian  chronicle  mentions  the  destruction  of  the 
city  Sahara' in  as  following  closely  upon  Shalmaneser's 
ascension  (that  is,  in  726),  and  this  city,  which  was  in  all 
probability  the  "  Sepharvaim  "  referred  to  by  Sinacherib's 
boastful  ambassador1  (2  K.  xviii.  34;  xix.  13),  and  the 
''  Sibraim  "  of  Ezek.  xlvii.  16,  was  situated,  according  to 
the  last-named  passage,  between  Hamath  arid  Damascus. 
Rumours  of  the  unsettlement  and  seditious  purposes  of 
Israel  appear  to  have  reached  the  leader  of  the  Assyrian 
army ;  for  the  compiler  of  the  narrative  in  Kings  tells  us 
that  "  Shalmaneser  came  against  Hoshea,  and  that  Hoshea 
became  his  vassal,  and  rendered  him  tribute."  In  view  of 
Hoshea's  relations  with  Tiglathpileser  (§  332),  this  can 
only  mean  that,  in  consequence  of  the  threatening  presence 
of  the  Assyrian  army,  Hoshea  rendered  homage  to  his  new 
suzerain,  and  yielded  promptly  the  tribute  which,  perhaps, 
he  had  been  remiss  in  delivering.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
assume,  on  any  fair  principle  of  interpretation,  that  Shal- 
maneser appeared  in  person  before  Samaria  in  this  first 
year  of  his  reign.  The  Bible  report  goes  on  to  tell  of 
Hoshea's  sending  messengers  to  Seve  (§  343),  king  of 
Egypt,  and  withholding  from  Assyria  the  tribute  which  he 
had  paid  "year  upon  year."  This  expression  implies  that 
at  least  two  years  had  elapsed  between  the  formal  submis- 

1  This  identification  was  first  proposed  by  Hal6vy.  Ewald  (History 
of  Israel,  iv,  162  f.  Engl.  tr.)  showed  conclusively,  many  years  ago,  that 
Sepharvaim  was  not  to  be  found  in  Babylonia.  He  also  identified  it  with 
the  Sibraim  of  Ezekiel. 


390  HOSHEA'S   REVOLT   AND  CAPTURE  BOOK  VI 

sion  of  Hoshea  and  his  conspiracy  with  Egypt.  That  is, 
the  attempted  revolt,  which  brought  Shalmaneser  himself 
with  his  army  against  Israel,  could  not  have  taken  place 
earlier  than  724.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  succeeding  state- 
ments of  the  narrative  imply  that  this  was  the  date  of 
Hoshea's  conspiracy,  since  they  inform  us  that,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  revolt,  Samaria  was  besieged,  and  that  the 
city  was  taken  in  the  third  year  of  its  investment;  while 
we  learn  from  the  cuneiform  documents  that  the  date  of 
the  capture  was  near  the  close  of  the  Babylonian  year  722. 

§  850.  The  unhappy  king  of  Israel  was  disappointed  in 
his  hopes  of  help  from  the  ambitious  but  sadly  hampered 
king  of  Egypt,  and  was  apparently  compelled  to  face  his 
Assyrian  pursuers  unprepared.  He  was  taken  prisoner, 
with  how  many  others  we  do  not  know,  outside  Samaria, 
and,  as  we  may  assume,  carried  away  to  Nineveh.  The 
whole  land  was  overrun,  and,  as  the  extreme  penalty  of 
rebellion,  the  capital  was  doomed  to  destruction. 

§  351.  The  final  siege  of  Samaria  lacks  no  element  of 
interest  and  pathos.  The  details  are  not  given  us  from 
any  source,  since,  as  has  repeatedly  been  observed,  it  was 
not  in  accordance  with  the  genius  of  the  Semitic  annalists 
to  state  the  particulars  of  an  action  or  to  analyze  the 
processes  and  stages  of  a  catastrophe.  They  accepted 
results  as  the  expression  and  indication  of  the  divine 
will,  and  these  alone  they  recorded.  But  material  is  not 
lacking  to  enable  us  to  get  a  fairly  accurate  idea  of  the 
condition  of  the  beleaguered  citizens  of  Samaria,  while  the 
voice  of  Prophecy  proclaims  the  moral  lessons  of  the  catas- 
trophe, and  its  significance  for  all  peoples  and  ages.  On 
the  one  side,  the  last  years  of  the  people  of  the  northern 
capital  give  us  occasion  for  sympathy,  and  even  for 
admiration ;  on  the  other,  their  fate  bids  us  moderns  listen 
anew  to  the  warning:  — 

Discite  justitiam  moniti  et  non  temnere  divos. 
§  352.    It   was   but   a   meagre   survival   of  the    "  Ten 


CH.  VIII,  §  353  ISOLATION  OF   SAMARIA  391 

Tribes  "  that  was  left  to  face  the  inexorable  vengeance  of 
the  votaries  of  Asshur.  Once  before  (§  236)  Samaria  had 
been  almost  destroyed,  and  that  by  a  terrible  foe.  But 
the  Aramaeans  of  Damascus  had  neither  the  resources  nor 
effective  military  policy  of  the  Assyrians.  Xo\v  Avhen  a 
section  of  any  country  was  wrested  from  the  main  body  by 
these  fell  destroyers,  it  was  no  longer  capable  in  better 
times  of  uniting  itself  with  its  former  governmental 
system,  as  had  been  repeatedly  done  by  the  sundered 
fragments  of  Israel  during  the  Syrian  wars ;  it  was  actually 
rendered  hostile,  by  being  filled  with  a  population  sub- 
servient to  the  conquerors  (§  288  f.),  and  was  made  a  base 
of  operations  or  vantage-ground  for  ready  attack  upon  the 
parent  state.  So,  in  these  last  times  of  the  northern 
kingdom,  the  country  north  of  the  valley  of  Megiddo  — 
that  beautiful  but  fatal  bisector  of  Israel  —  was  held  and 
administered  by  Assyrians  (§  331),  and  Gilead  and  Bashan, 
whether  taken  by  Tiglathpileser  or  not,  were  certainly  lost 
to  the  remnant  that  still  held  out  in  the  hill-country  of 
Ephraim.  The  condition  of  Samaria  was  therefore  abso- 
lutely desperate,  and  this,  at  first  thought,  increases  the 
wonder  that  it  had  bidden  defiance  to  Shalmaneser.  More- 
over, it  is  to  be  considered  that  by  the  time  the  Assyrians 
appeared  before  Samaria  all  the  country  around  had  been 
devastated,  and  the  city  itself  rendered  less  able  to  endure 
a  long  siege,  by  reason  of  the  refugees,  who,  in  all  con- 
siderable ancient  wars,  thronged  the  strongest  fortresses 
at  the  approach  of  a  victorious  enemy.1  This  isolation  of 
Samaria  rendered  less  probable  than  ever  the  arrival  of 
succour  from  Egypt,  or  a  relieving  force  from  any  other 
possible  ally.  It  is  probable  that  such  help  was  still 
expected,  otherwise  it  seems  difficult  to  explain  their 
prolonged  resistance. 

§  353.    It  is,  however,  to  be  remembered  that  Samaria 
was  now  a  rebellious  state,  which,  in  addition  to  revolt 

1  Cf.  Macaulay's  vivid  picture  in  "  Horatius  at  the  Bridge." 


392  SAMARIA  AND   THE  PROPHETS  BOOK  VI 

upon  its  second  probation  (§  288)  had  been  guilty  of  con- 
spiring with  other  nations  hostile  to  Assyria.  The  most 
instructive  parallel  is  that  which  is  afforded  by  Judah  under 
Hezekiah,  twenty  years  later,  and  there  we  find  that  the 
Assyrians  were  determined  to  resort  to  their  final  method 
of  deportation,  even  when  desirous  of  securing  a  peace- 
ful capitulation  of  the  defenders  of  the  besieged  capital 
(2  K.  xviii.  32).  It  was  doubtless  their  purpose,  therefore, 
to  uproot  the  revolters  and  send  them  into  exile.  The 
Samarians,  therefore,  fought  for  the  country  and  their 
homes  in  a  special  and  peculiar  sense,  which  it  is  difficult 
for  those  familiar  only  with  modern  and  Occidental  history 
fully  to  appreciate.  But,  all  the  same,  their  stubborn 
resistance,  in  the  face  of  such  an  enemy,  had  in  it  a  touch 
of  the  heroic. 

§  354.  The  interest  of  Prophecy  in  the  Northern  King- 
dom had  become  less  direct  since  the  utterance  of  the 
ineffective  pleadings  and  denunciations  of  Hosea  (§  304, 
314).  After  his  time  no  great  Prophet  seems  to  have 
arisen  among  the  people,  and  it  is  very  possible  that  any 
one  of  his  t}-pe,  or  of  the  type  of  Amos,  who,  equally  with 
him,  proclaimed  the  certain  destruction  of  the  state,  would 
have  fared  hardly  at  the  hands  of  all  leading  parties.  Life 
was  almost  intolerable  to  Hosea,  whose  task  was  already 
done  when  Tiglathpileser  invaded  the  land;  and  his 
career  of  self-immolation  found  no  imitators  in  the  suc- 
ceeding period  of  political  and  spiritual  decline.  Yet  the 
voice  of  Prophecy  was  still  raised;  her  mission,  now  trans- 
ferred entirely  to  the  Southern  Kingdom,  was  fulfilled  in 
applying  the  lessons  of  the  sad  fate  of  Ephraim  to  the 
conditions  and  fortunes  of  Judah.  In  the  whole  history 
of  Prophecy  there  is  nothing  more  significant,  or  more 
melancholy,  than  this  abandonment  of  what  was  once  the 
main  representative  of  Israel.  Forty  years  before  the 
reign  of  the  last  king  of  Samaria,  Amos  could  even  leave 
his  home  in  the  pastures  of  the  south,  and,  at  the  peril  of 
his  life,  fulfil  his  ministry  as  a  Prophet,  not  among  his  own 


CH.  VIII,  §  355        AMOS,  HOSEA,  AND   ISAIAH  393 

people,  but  among  their  northern  kindred.  But  now,  when 
Isaiah  and  Micah  have  to  take  up  their  case,  they  do  not 
deal  with  them  as  subjects  for  warning  or  encouragement 
or  rebuke,  or  even  for  intercession.  They  refer  to  them  as 
enemies  of  the  kingdom  of  Jehovah,  and,  as  such,  predict 
their  speedy  overthrow  and  obliteration.  True,  both  Amos 
and  Hosea  had  foretold  their  subjection  to  Assyria  and 
their  exile;  but,  while  the  prevision  of  Amos  had  been 
merely  a  vague  and  distant  outlook,  and  the  pendulum 
swings  of  Hosea's  ejaculations  had  vibrated  between  the 
horrible  dread  of  destruction  and  the  trembling  hope  of 
ultimate  restoration,  Isaiah  and  Micah  know  only  of  their 
ruin,  and  of  their  extinction  as  a  theocratic  people.  For 
the  kingdom  of  the  Ten  Tribes,  in  other  ways  than  in  mere 
political  results,  it  was  a  fatal  step  that  was  taken  when  it 
joined  the  enemies  of  Judah  (§  316). 

§  355.  Isaiah's  predictions  of  the  repulse  and  of  the 
ultimate  fall  of  Samaria,  in  connection  with  the  last-named 
event,  we  have  already  considered  (§  327,  330).  It  is 
noticeable  that  he  announced  specifically  the  capture  of 
that  famous  stronghold,  in  the  words  "the  fortress  shall 
cease  from  Ephraim  "  (xvii.  3).  A  great  prophecy  of  his 
(ch.  xxviii.),  written  just  before  the  time  with  which  we 
are  now  concerned,  takes  the  same  theme  for  its  text,  and, 
though  it  was  uttered  in  the  interest  of  Judah  alone,  it 
gives  us  a  faithful  pen  picture  of  the  morality  and  public 
life  of  the  gay  Samarian  capital,  which  was  already  totter- 
ing to  its  fall.  This  brief  glance  at  Samaria  is  full  of 
historical  suggestion,  and  also  full  of  meaning  for  thought- 
ful statesmen  and  citizens  of  all  modern  nations.  It  was 
the  practical  summarizing  of  the  ethical  and  sociological 
teachings  of  the  history  of  the  Northern  Kingdom.  Es- 
trangement from  the  true  worship  of  Jehovah,  with  the 
consequent  loss  of  motives  to  morality,  had  led  to  all  sorts 
of  self-indulgence,  which  was  still  further  promoted  by  the 
false  worship  and  its  seductions  to  evil  encouraged  by  the 
foreign  policy  of  many  of  the  kings.  And  now  the  long 


394  ISAIAH  AND   MICAH  BOOK  VI 

course  of  frivolity  and  sensuality  fittingly  culminated  in  a 
general  riot  of  debauchery.  So  frequent  and  prolonged 
were  the  revels,  and  so  completely  given  over  to  luxury 
and  excess  were  the  leaders  of  the  people,  that  the  fair  city 
itself,  encircled  by  the  vine-clad  hills  that  wreathed  it 
around  with  verdure  and  beauty,  is  called  by  the  Prophet 
"  the  crown  of  pride  of  the  drunkards  of  Ephraim,  and  the 
fading  bloom  of  his  splendour,  on  the  summit  of  the  fertile 
valley  of  those  who  are  laid  prostrate  with  wine."  Upon 
this  scene  of  natural  and  artificial  loveliness,  the  denuncia- 
tion of  "woe,"  in  the  same  breath,  is  inevitable  in  the 
mouth  of  Isaiah;  his  voice  is  only  an  echo,  given  back 
from  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  of  the  terrible,  unheeded 
words  of  Amos  (iii.  9  ff. ;  iv.  3;  v.  16  f . ;  vi.  3  if.)  and 
Hosea  (e.g.  x.  5  ff. ;  xiii.  15  f.),  proclaiming  that  Samaria 
was  about  to  fulfil  her  doom. 

§  356.  More  specific,  as  regards  the  catastrophe  itself, 
is  the  utterance  of  Micah.  Like  his  predecessor  and 
colleague  of  Jerusalem,  this  Prophet  from  the  little  town 
of  Moresheth-Gath,  that  bordered  on  the  Philistian  high- 
way of  international  traffic,  was  stirred  to  grief  and  anxiety 
for  his  own  country  by  the  impending  ruin  of  Samaria. 
The  condition  of  that  proud  capital  appears  to  him  as  a 
veritable  dignus  vindice  nodus.  So  in  his  vision  "  Jehovah 
comes  forth  from  his  place,  and  comes  down  and  strides 
along  the  heights  of  the  earth;  and  the  mountains  melt 
before  him  and  the  lowlands  are  cloven  asunder,  like  wax 
before  the  fire,  like  waters  tumbling  down  a  declivity. 
Through  the  apostasy  of  Jacob  comes  all  this,  and  through 
the  sins  of  the  House  of  Israel.  ...  So  I  will  make 
Samaria  a  ruin  in  a  field,  and  a  plantation  for  vineyards ; 
and  I  will  tumble  her  stones  into  the  valley  and  lay  bare 
her  foundations  "  (i.  3  ff.).  The  cycle  of  Prophecy  relating 
to  Samaria  fitly  closes  with  this  sublime  theophany,  the 
absolute  accuracy  of  whose  literal  statements  is  attested  to 
this  day  by  the  features  of  the  doomed  city  in  its  ruins. 

§  357.    Since  no  details  of  the  catastrophe  have  been 


CH.  VIII,  §  359     THE    SIEGE   AND  THE   NEW   KING  395 

preserved,  we  can  only  conjecture  its  general  course  from 
the  analogy  of  numberless  other  sieges  which  mark  the 
chief  epochs  of  Oriental  history.  The  site  of  the  city 
rendered  it  almost,  or  altogether,  impregnable  against  the 
aggressive  methods  of  ancient  warfare.  Omri  had  chosen 
his  fortress  well;  upon  the  precipitous  slopes,  whether 
terraced  or  unbroken,  it  was  impossible  to  bring  either 
belfries  or  battering-rams  to  play  upon  the  walls.  The 
slow  process  of  starving  into  surrender  by  a  close  blockade 
was  necessarily  resorted  to.  When  the  resources  of  the 
besieged  were  just  about  exhausted  Shalmaneser  died  a 
natural  death,  apparently,  however,  not  before  Samaria; 
and  the  easy  task  of  effecting  the  entrance  and  arranging 
the  capitulation,  along  with  the  glory  of  the  conquest  of 
the  rebellious  kingdom,  fell  to  his  more  fortunate  and  re- 
nowned successor. 

§  358.  Sargon  (Sar-kenu,  722-705) — that  is,  Sargon  the 
Second,  or  "the  Later,"  as  he  calls  himself,  with  allusion 
to  the  great  Sargon  of  North  Babylonia  (§  89  f.)  —  came  to 
the  throne  on  the  twelfth  of  Tebet,  the  tenth  month  of  the 
year  which  began  with  the  spring  equinox  of  722;  that 
is,  early  in  December  of  the  same  year.  He  was  not  the 
son  of  Shalmaneser,  but  was  possibly  of  princely  descent, 
though  we  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  how  close  or 
remote  its  connection  was  with  his  predecessors.  It  may 
be  taken  for  granted  that  he  was  an  official  high  in  rank ; 
and,  from  the  fact  that  there  is  no  indication  of  a  popular 
disturbance,  much  less  any  of  a  revolution  in  Assyria 
proper,  in  connection  with  his  accession,  it  is  fair  to  assume 
that  he  stood  well  in  favour,  both  with  the  people  at  large 
and  with  the  previous  regime.  Indeed,  it  is  quite  possible 
that  Shalmaneser  had  chosen  him  as  his  own  successor.1 

§  359.  Sargon  was  the  founder  of  the  last  and  most 
powerful  Assyrian  dynasty,  which  for  a  round  century 
held  control  of  Western  Asia,  and  also,  for  the  latter  half 
of  the  same  period,  of  Egypt  and  Ethiopia  as  well.  His 

1  See  Note  15  in  Appendix. 


396         CHARACTER   AND   EARLY  ACTS   OF   SARGON    BOOK  VI 

achievements,  both  in  the  arts  of  war  and  of  peace,  entitle 
him  to  a  high  rank  among  ancient  Asiatic  rulers.  His- 
torically, his  chief  distinction  is  that  he  was  able  to  hold 
together,  by  tremendous  efforts,  the  huge  conglomeration 
of  principalities  whose  union  was  first  systematically 
enforced  by  Tiglathpileser.  As  regards  his  personal  endow- 
ments and  character,  he  is  not  only  one  of  the  most 
imposing,  but  also  one  of  the  least  uncongenial  to  modern 
observers,  of  all  the  kings  of  Assyria.  Compared  with 
the  great  Tiglathpileser,  he  was  somewhat  as  Darius 
Hystaspes  was  to  Cyrus,  being,  moreover,  his  second 
successor,  and,  besides,  not  his  lineal  descendant;  he,  too, 
kept  together,  by  dint  of  skill,  energy,  and  prowess,  the 
empire  which  his  predecessor  had  built  up.  His  inscrip- 
tions, which  have  been  preserved  to  us  more  fully  than 
those  of  most  of  the  other  kings  of  Assyria  and  Babylon, 
show  him  to  have  been  a  ruler  of  universal  activity  and 
versatile  talents.  While  his  uninterrupted  campaigns  and 
their  almost  unbroken  series  of  triumphs  attest  his  military 
genius,  the  vast  remains  of  his  palaces  bear  witness  to  his 
architectural  taste  and  enterprise. 

§  360.  From  the  beginning  of  his  reign  he  was  kept 
busy  by  hereditary  foes,  revolted  provinces,  and  rebellious 
vassals.  His  first  achievement,  if  such  it  may  be  called, 
was  the  capture  of  Samaria.1  It  is  difficult  to  get  an 
absolutely  accurate  notion  of  the  data  that  define  the 
conclusion  of  this  memorable  siege.  The  following  con- 
jectural outline  is  perhaps  most  accordant  with  the  ascer- 
tained facts.  The  siege,  now  well  011  in  its  third  year, 
was  brought  nearly  to  its  close  by  the  Assyrian  generals, 
in  the  absence  of  Shalmaneser,  who,  whether  on  account  of 
declining  health  or  the  business  of  state,  was,  during  the 
latter  part  of  722,  at  home  in  his  capital.  The  blockade 
was  maintained  vigorously  throughout;  the  news  of  the 
death  of  Shalmaneser,  and  of  the  inauguration  of  an 
entirely  new  regime,  made  no  difference  in  the  loyalty  or 

1  See  Note  10  m  Appendix. 


CH.  VIII,  §  361    THE  TWO  KINGS  AND  THE   SIEGE  397 

the  energy  of  the  commanders.  It  is  quite  possible,  indeed, 
that  the  surrender  took  place  in  the  absence  of  the  new 
king  also.  Sargon  claims  the  conquest  for  himself;  but 
we  know  that  the  Assyrian  rulers  did  not  always  give  due 
credit  to  their  lieutenants  for  the  successes  gained  by  the 
latter.  At  any  rate,  it  is  extremely  doubtful  whether 
the  new  monarch  could  conveniently  arrive  at  the  seat  of 
the  war  in  Palestine  within  the  limits  of  time  indicated  in 
his  own  record  of  the  event;  for  he  intimates  that  the 
capture  took  place  between  the  end  of  December,  722,  and 
the  spring  solstice  of  721.  Since  Sargon  came  to  the 
throne  immediately  upon  the  death  of  Shalmaneser,  it  is 
most  proper  to  assume  that  both  of  them  were  in  or  near 
the  capital  at  the  time.  The  supposition  that  Shalmaneser 
died  before  Samaria,  and  that  Sargon,  as  commander  of  the 
army  of  occupation,  was  chosen  to  the  succession  by  the 
generals,  may  be  dismissed  as  out  of  accord  with  the  peace- 
ful character  of  the  accession;  and  still  less  explicable 
would  the  same  state  of  things  be,  on  the  assumption  that 
either  of  them  was  at  the  capital  and  the  other  before 
Samaria.  Now,  Sargon  tells  us  that  it  was  in  "the 
beginning  "  of  his  reign  that  he  took  Samaria.  This  was 
the  technical  term  for  the  period  between  the  accession 
of  an  Assyrian  monarch  and  the  beginning  of  the  next 
statutory  year,  or  the  spring  equinox.  Under  any  circum- 
stances, and  especially  as  the  founder  of  a  new  dynasty 
in  an  unsettled  empire,  it  must  have  been  necessary  for 
Sargon  to  remain  some  little  time  at  Nineveh  for  the 
settlement  of  business.  Hence  we  conclude  that  the 
capitulation  of  Samaria  took  place  without  the  direct  inter- 
ference of  King  Sargon,  whatever  part  he  may  possibly 
have  taken  in  the  conduct  of  the  war  at  an  earlier  stage. 
§  361.  In  the  subsequent  fate  of  Samaria,  Sargon's  was 
certainly  the  directing  mind.  With  the  fall  of  the  capital 
the  territory  of  Ephraim  now  followed  the  rest  of  the 
old  Northern  Kingdom  and  became  an  Assyrian  province. 
Its  history,  so  important  to  Bible  students,  so  interesting, 


398  KEY   TO   THE   SUBSEQUENT   HISTORY          BOOK  VI 

and  yet  so  greatly  misconceived,  can  only  be  understood 
when  it  is  remembered  that  the  country  was  administered 
wholly  as  a  part  of  the  Assyrian  empire  and  in  accordance 
with  its  well-settled  policy.  Both  the  Biblical  statements 
and  those  of  Sargon  himself  have  to  be  read  in  the  light  of 
what  we  have  learned  as  to  the  relations  of  the  subject 
states  to  the  central  authority  (§  285  ff. ).  And  it  is  to 
be  particularly  observed  that  the  treatment  accorded  to 
Samaria,  as  we  find  it  detailed  in  these  records,  was  the 
carrying  out  of  a  system,  and  was  not  worked  out  in  a 
month  or  a  year.  It  extended  over  nearly  a  century  (Ezra 
iv.  10),  and  is  one  of  the  best  extant  illustrations  of  the 
policy  of  denationalization,  repression,  and  assimilation, 
persistently  carried  out  towards  the  subject  peoples  by  the 
rulers  of  the  New  Empire,  till  Assyria  attained  the  summit 
of  its  power  and  the  limits  of  its  capacity  of  cohesion  and 
government.  Our  two  sources  of  information  may  be 
collated  as  follows.  The  Inscriptions  tell  us  of  the  spoil- 
ing of  Samaria  and  of  the  deportation  of  a  certain  portion 
of  its  inhabitants.  The  Hebrew  records  give  the  destina- 
tion of  the  exiled  Samarians,  and  tell  particularly  of  the 
colonizing  of  the  old  Israelitish  territory,  the  origin  of 
the  new  occupants,  their  character,  and  their  fortunes  in 
the  strange  land  of  the  strange  God.  In  short,  they 
sketch  the  history  of  the  new  settlement,  and  give  us  the 
best  picture  that  we  have  of  the  conditions  developed  by 
the  commingling  of  races  with  diverse  religious  and  social 
and  political  antecedents,  under  the  old  Semitic  regime 
in  Western  Asia.  The  picture  may  also  serve  as  a  type 
of  numberless  other  instances  of  the  forced  agglutination 
of  incompatible  elements,  devised  and  effected  in  the  vain 
hope  of  levelling  to  one  uniform  quiescent  community  the 
host  of  nationalities  that  were  to  be  made  the  subjects 
of  Asshur. 

§  362.  The  city  was  entered  by  the  Assyrian  troops 
early  in  721,  according  to  our  reckoning.  It  was  held  by 
them  till  Sargon  was  in  a  position  to  dispose  of  its  affairs. 


CH.  VIII,  §  363  THE  DEPORTATION  399 

Meanwhile,  an  examination  was  held  into  the  state  of  the 
city,  the  character  and  extent  of  its  possessions,  and  of  the 
property  that  had  been  stored  by  the  people  of  the  outlying 
towns,  who  had  taken  refuge  within  the  walls.  The 
responsibility  for  the  insurrection  and  conspiracy  was  fixed 
upon  certain  of  the  leaders  and  their  followers.  Sargon 
decreed  that  these,  to  the  number  of  27,290,  including 
their  families,  should  be  deported.  He  does  not  mention 
the  regions  to  which  they  were  transferred;  but  this  is 
supplied  in  the  Biblical  narrative,  which  informs  us  that 
"  in  the  ninth  year  of  Hoshea  the  king  of  Assyria  took 
Samaria,  and  carried  Israel  away  unto  Assyria,  and  placed 
them  in  Halah,  and  Habor  the  river  of  Gozan,  and  the 
cities  of  Media"  (2  K.  xvii.  6;  cf.  xviii.  11).  This  points 
to  at  least  two,  or,  in  all  probability,  three  bands  or  groups 
of  exiles.  The  first  indicated  was  perhaps  sent  to  Kasshite 
territory  east  of  the  Tigris ;  the  second  was  destined  for 
the  banks  of  the  chief  tributary  of  the  Euphrates,  half-way 
between  Charran  and  Nineveh;  and  the  third  was  trans- 
ported to  the  far  eastern  provinces  of  the  empire,  whose 
subjection  offered  as  serious  difficulties  to  the  Assyrian 
kings  as  did  the  West-land  itself.  These  separate  depor- 
tations were  evidently  rather  episodes  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  subjugated  territory  than  punishments  inflicted 
all  at  once  upon  the  rebellious  inhabitants.  In  fact,  the 
distribution  of  the  third  detachment  of  exiles  could  not 
have  been  effected  till  six  years  after  the  surrender,  since 
it  was  only  then  that  Sargon  came  into  possession  of 
Median  territory,  the  conquests  of  Tiglathpileser  III  in 
that  rugged  region  of  stubborn  mountaineers  not  having 
been  permanent  (§  311). 

§  363.  It  may  be  remarked  in  passing,  that  this  is  the 
whole  story  of  the  famous  "Dispersion  of  the  Ten  Tribes." 
Our  narrative  has  already  shown,  at  several  stages,  how, 
little  by  little,  the  Ten  Tribes  came  to  lose  their  original 
autonomy,  and  how,  even  in  their  own  land,  several  of 
them  became  gradually  extinguished.  Now,  besides  the 


400  FATE   OF   THE    "LOST   TRIBES"  BOOK  VI 

partial  deportation  of  the  northern  communities  by  Tiglath- 
pileser  III  (§  332),  these  successive  transplantings  are 
the  only  ones  we  know  of.  We  see,  therefore,  what  the 
problem  of  accounting  for  the  "  Lost  Tribes  "  amounts  to. 
The  number  of  the  expelled  peoples  given  by  Sargon 
doubtless  includes  all  that  were  sent  away  during  his 
reign,  and  this  comprised  but  a  small  portion  of  the 
inhabitants,  even  of  the  reduced  Samarian  territory. 
Twenty  years  later,  more  than  seven  times  this  number 
were  carried  away  from  Judah,  without  destroying  the 
integrity  of  the  kingdom.  To  preclude  any  further  temp- 
tation to  search  for  these  mythical  wanderers,  it  is  worth 
while  pointing  out  that  this  comparatively  small  number 
speedily  lost  its  identity,  by  being  absorbed  in  the  new 
populations  to  which  it  was  introduced.  Those  who  were 
transported  to  Media  disappeared  in  a  generation  or  two, 
scattered  as  they  were  in  small  companies,  among  utterly 
alien  peoples,  themselves  in  a  state  of  rapid  transformation 
by  reason  of  the  influx  of  Iranians  from  Central  Asia. 
And  even  those  who  were  settled  near  the  River  Habor, 
living  as  they  did  among  the  kindred  Aramaean  race, 
would,  by  reason  of  their  kinship,  be  readily  assimilated 
to  their  social  and  religious  environment,  and  so  lose  their 
corporate,  as  well  as  racial,  identity. 

§  364.  Attention  has  been  particularly  fixed  upon  Sa- 
maria, mainly  because  of  its  importance  in  the  history  of 
Revelation.  But  the  general  political  significance  of  its 
downfall  and  capture  is  also  by  no  means  to  be  underrated. 
As  the  strongest  fortress  near  the  valley  of  Megiddo,  the 
great  highway  of  caravans  and  armies,  and  as  the  historic 
centre  of  a  populous  and  fertile  country,  its  possession 
must  have  been  of  great  consequence  to  the  empire  of  the 
Tigris.1  This  explains  the  care  which  the  kings  of  Assyria 
henceforth  took  to  have  it  occupied  by  a  docile  and  loyal 

1  The  remark  of  Winckler  (Sargontexte,  p.  xvi),  that  the  city  and  its 
siege  were  of  comparatively  little  importance,  is  hardly  borne  out  by  later 
history,  or  even  by  Sargon's  own  inscriptions. 


CH.  VIII,  §  364     S ARGON'S   POLICY  AND   ITS   MOTIVES  401 


population.  So  it  happened  that,  while  Sargon's  policy 
aimed  at  the  disintegration  and  effacement  of  the  con- 
quered nationality,  his  measures  here  were  the  very  reverse 
of  harsh,  at  least  as  compared  with  those  adopted  by  him 
in  other  recorded  instances,  and  with  the  customary  pro- 
cedure of  the  Assyrians  with  regard  to  rebellious  vassals. 
He  purposely  granted  the  remnant  of  Israel  exceptional 
immunities.  He  contented  himself  with  appropriating  to 
his  own  military  service  fifty  war  chariots ;  and  those  of 
the  people  who  were  not  sent  abroad  were  left  undisturbed 
in  the  possession  of  their  goods.  Indeed,  so  far  was  the 
conquest  from  obliterating  the  national  life,  that  less  than 
two  years  later  a  section  at  least  of  the  old  kingdom  was 
found  assisting  a  neighbouring  state  in  a  revolt  against 
the  common  oppressor.  If  the  design  of  the  Great  King, 
in  thus  extending  unaccustomed  clemency  towards  the 
Samarians,  was  to  cultivate  a  friendly  feeling  among  the 
inhabitants  of  Palestine,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to  retain 
possession  of  the  redoubtable  fortress  at  as  little  cost  as 
possible,  it  is  evident  that  his  measures  did  not  meet  at 
once  with  entire  success. 

2  n 


APPENDIX 


NOTE   1   (§  19) 

GROUPING   OF    THE    SEMITIC    LANGUAGES 

THE  following  classification  of  the  Semitic  languages  and 
principal  dialects  may  be  of  interest  in  connection  with  the 
ethnological  grouping  given  in  the  text. 

A.  North-Semitic. 

I.  BABYLONIAN  (Assyrian). 
II.    ARAMAIC. 

a.  East- Aramaic. 

1.  Classical  Syriac  (Northern  Mesopotamia). 

2.  Mandaite  (Lower  Babylonia). 

3.  Babylonian  Talmudic. 

4.  ' '  Modern  Syriac ' '  (Upper  Tigris  region,  Kurdistan,  Urmia) . 

b.  West-Aramaic. 

1.  Biblical  Aramaic. 

2.  Targumic. 

3.  Samaritan. 

4.  Nabataean  (inscriptional). 
6.  Palinyrene  (inscriptional). 

III.  CANAANITIC. 

a.   Hebraic  (Hebrew,  Moabite,  etc.). 
6.   Phoenician. 

B.  South-Semitic. 

I.  SABJEAN  (Himyaritic). 
II.  ETHIOPIC  (with  modern  Tigr6,  Amharic,  etc.). 

III.  ARABIC. 

403 


404  APPENDIX  NOTE  2 

NOTE   2    (§  36) 

MALIK    AND    MALK 

THE  longer  (participial)  form  has  also  been  preserved  in  the 
name  of  the  North-Semitic  god,  Assyr.  Malik,  Canaanitic  Molek 
(not  "  Moloch  ") ;  that  is,  apparently,  the  god-chief.  The  word 
is  precisely  the  same  as  that  of  the  Aramaean  Nestorian  digni- 
tary (hence  the  Armenio-Russian  name  Melikoff},  so  that  both 
the  longer  and  the  shorter  forms  are  preserved  in  the  three 
great  North-Semitic  families.  Layard  (Nineveh  and  its  Remains, 
i,  187  ff.)  and  Socin  (Encycl.  Brit.  vol.  xvii,  p.  357)  give  a 
wrong  pronunciation  (melek,  melik).  The  a  in  the  word  is 
long,  and  has  the  sound  of  a  in  father,  as  I  have  repeatedly 
verified  it  from  the  lips  of  native  Nestorians.  Layard  is  also 
wrong  in  restricting  the  term  and  the  office  to  the  chiefs  of 
Tiyari,  as  it  occurs  among  all  the  Nestorian  districts  under 
Turkish  rule.  The  natives  clearly  distinguish  between  malk 
and  malik,  the  former  being  "the  Sultan  of  Stamboul."  Socin 
is  also  in  error  in  making,  without  qualification,  the  office 
hereditary.  That  principle  is  certainly  recognized,  but  the 
clinging  to  primitive  customs  is  so  strong  that,  as  I  have  been 
assured,  a  good  man  is  chosen  from  the  people,  mainly  on  the 
recommendation  of  the  bishop,  when  the  son  or  sons  of  a 
deceased  malik  are  in  any  way  objectionable. 

NOTE  3  (§  42) 

PHOENICIAN    COLONIZATION 

IT  is  not  known  even  approximately  where  the  first  Phoeni- 
cian city  was  founded,  or  when  Phoenician  commerce  began. 
Whoever  took  the  Babylouians  over  to  Cyprus  must  have 
started  from  the  opposite  coastland,  and  as  we  have  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  the  Phoenicians  did  not  begin  the  commerce 
with  which  the  world  has  associated  their  name,  it  may  be 
assumed  in  the  meanwhile  that  they  were  the  carriers.  This 
would  make  their  maritime  enterprises  to  have  begun  not  later 
than  about  4000  B.C.  (§  90,  97).  For  a  long  time  Sidon  was  the 


NOTE  3  APPENDIX  405 

leading  city-state,  as  it  was  presumably  the  first  of  all  the 
settlements  between  the  Cilician  coast  and  Mount  Carmel  to 
attain  to  wealth  and  an  extensive  commerce.  Hence  the  usage 
of  the  name  Sidonians  for  the  Phoenicians  as  a  whole  in  the 
Old  Testament  (Jud.  xviii.  7,  28;  Deut.  iii.  9;  1  K.  v.  20,  xvi. 
31),  and  among  the  ancients  generally.  The  earliest  foreign 
settlements  were  naturally  made  in  Cyprus.  Indeed,  the  Old 
Testament  usage  of  ttTO  (i.e.  Kition,  the  nearest  port  in  the 
island)  for  the  maritime  settlements  of  the  Mediterranean  is 
of  itself  a  proof  of  the  immemorial  association  of  the  first 
colony  of  Phoenicia  with  the  commerce  of  the  great  West. 
From  Cyprus,  the  most  momentous  voyages  of  antiquity  were 
made  to  Rhodes  and  beyond  (by  at  least  the  fifteenth  century 
B.C.)  through  the  yEgean.  Thus  trading-stations  were  erected, 
and  the  germs  of  Semitic  civilization  deposited  among  the 
islands  and  along  the  coasts  of  Greece.  That  they  had  factories 
on  the  Grecian  mainland  there  can  be  no  doubt  whatever, 
difficult  and  usually  impossible  though  it  may  be  to  follow  ac- 
curately in  their  tracks  or  to  detect  their  long-vanished  traces 
(cf.  Meyer,  GA.  §  192).  From  these  they  were  expelled  by  the 
Greeks  themselves,  whom  they  had  taught  the  sea-faring  art, 
and  who  came  to  far  surpass  their  masters  in  the  business  of 
piracy,  and  to  equal  them  in  kidnapping  and  slave-dealing,  if 
not  in  the  soberer  methods  of  legitimate  commerce.  Their 
later  and  more  enduring  settlements  in  North  Africa  and 
Southern  Spain  lie  in  the  beaten  paths  of  history.  No  other 
of  the  ancient  authorities  has  given  such  precise  details  of  the 
range  and  objects  of  Phoenician  trade  as  the  Hebrew  Ezekiel 
(ch.  xxvii.).  A  partial  notion  of  the  enterprise  of  the  Phoeni- 
cians, and  of  their  importance  in  the  development  of  civiliza- 
tion as  well  as  to  their  contemporaries,  may  be  gained  by 
calling  to  mind  the  uses  of  the  alloy  bronze  in  ancient  times, 
and  the  fact  that  the  business  of  furnishing  copper  and  tin, 
wherever  these  were  mined  (often  hundreds  of  miles  apart), 
was  almost  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  Phoenicians.  A  kin- 
dred reflection  is  suggested  by  the  economic  phenomenon  of 
the  interchange  in  commercial  value  of  gold  and  silver,  the 
depreciation  of  the  latter  having  been  brought  about  through 
the  abundance  and  wide  circulation  of  the  products  of  the 


406  APPENDIX  NOTE  3 

mines  of  Southern  Spain ;  the  elaboration  of  the  ores,  and  the 
transportation  of  the  bullion  to  the  money  markets  of  the  East, 
being  for  centuries  in  the  hands  of  the  Phosnicians. 


NOTE   4    (§  131) 

AMOKITE    AND    CASTAANITE 

WELLHAUSEN,  in  Jahrb.  fur  deutsche  Theologie,  xxi,  602, 
(==  Skizzen  u.  Vorarbeiten,  133  f.),  asserts  that  "Amorites" 
was  the  designation  of  the  primitive  population  of  Palestine  in 
the  Elohist  (E)  and  in  Amos.  Steinthal  (Zeitschrift  fur  Volker- 
psychologie,  xii,  267)  has  also  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that 
Amorites  and  Canaanites  were  identical.  The  most  elaborate 
presentation  of  the  same  view  has  been  made  by  Ed.  Meyer  in 
ZATW.  I,  121-127,  who  has  been  approved  by  W.  Robert- 
son Smith  in  his  Prophets,  p.  26,  and  by  Stade,  GVI.  p.  110. 
Kittel  (GH.  p.  20  f.),  while  agreeing  with  Meyer  and  the 
others  as  to  the  usage  in  the  case,  is  not  convinced  that  the 
names  correspond  exactly  to  the  same  things.  I  shall  state 
the  main  positions  of  Meyer,  so  that  the  subject  may  be  fairly 
grasped  by  the  reader. 

The  general  statement  is  "that  the  ethnical  name  'Amorite  ' 
belongs  exclusively  to  the  Elohist,  and  the  name  Canaanite 
exclusively  to  the  Jehovist.  The  two  names  are  absolutely 
equivalent  in  import  and  range,  and  designate  the  total  pre- 
Israelitish  population  of  Palestine."  The  first  argument  is 
based  upon  the  alleged  authorship  and  usage  of  the  Book  of 
Joshua.  According  to  Meyer,  this  work,  with  the  exception  of 
a  few  interpolations,  "proceeds  entirely  from  the  Elohist,  and 
nothing  but  'Amorite  '  is  used  here  as  the  name  of  the  inhabi- 
tants" (p.  122).  Against  this  it  may  be  said,  that  while  the 
word  Amorite  occurs  18  times  in  Joshua,  the  word  Canaanite 
occurs  16  times,  apart  from  the  use  of  the  word  Canaan;  that 
the  greater  portion  of  Joshua  is  by  most  modern  critics  assigned 
to  the  Elohist  and  Jehovist  (JE),  and  that  it  is  impossible  to 
separate  the  twofold  contribution,  except  in  a  very  few  cases 
(cf.  Driver,  Intr.  p.  97);  that,  for  example,  while  Kautzsch 
and  Socin  assign  33  verses  out  of  the  whole  (viii.  3-29; 


NOTE  4  APPENDIX  407 

xv.  14-19)  to  J  alone,  they  attribute,  outside  of  ch.  xxiv.,  but 
19  verses  to  E  apart  from  J,  and  of  these  only  two  (i.  1  f . )  to 
E  independently  (Kautzsch,  etc.  ATU).  Finally,  Meyer  omits 
from  his  list  of  citations  from  Joshua,  ch.  iii.  10;  v.  1;  vii. 
7,  9;  xvi.  10;  xvii.  12,  13,  16,  18,  in  all  nine  cases. 

Again,  Meyer  appeals  to  the  character  and  usage  of  Deuter- 
onomy, claiming  that  the  book  is  throughout  of  Elohistic 
character,  and  that  in  it  the  use  of  Amorite,  as  opposed  to 
Canaanite,  is  almost  exclusive  of  the  latter.  The  case  here  is 
more  plausible  than  with  Joshua.  The  preponderance  of 
"Amorite"  is  undeniable  (15  cases  against  4),  and  the  only 
question  is  whether  the  usage  is  justified  by  a  real  distinction 
between  the  races.  The  difficulty  diminishes  when  it  is 
observed  that,  in  all  the  cases  except  3  (i.  7;  vii.  1;  xx. 
17),  reference  is  distinctly  made  to  the  "  Amorites "  east  of 
Jordan,  where  no  Canaanites  are  ever  located  by  any  Biblical 
writer !  It  is,  therefore,  unnecessary  for  the  argument  to  have 
•  it  decided  whether  Meyer  is  right  in  thinking  that  Deuteronomy 
is  almost  wholly  Elohistic. 

More  weight  must  be  attached  to  the  assertion  that  the 
Jehovist  uses  the  name  Canaanite  to  the  exclusion  of  Amorite. 
At  least,  this  appears  to  be  true  of  certain  passages  in  Genesis 
and  Exodus,  which  critics  generally  agree  in  assigning  to  J 
independently  of  E  (JE)  or  of  P  or  of  the  Deuteronomist.  The 
number  of  such  cases  is  indeed  very  small,  and  the  most  that 
can  be  affirmed  is  that  a  certain  usage  is  found  in  the  books  in 
question,  according  to  which  the  people  west  of  the  Jordan  are 
referred  to  as  Canaanites,  and  not  as  Amorites.  Whether  this 
can  be  accounted  for  on  the  supposition  that  the  name  Canaanite 
is  given  as  to  inhabitants  of  "  Canaan  "  is  an  open  question. 
It  must  be  admitted  to  be  peculiar  that  there  is  a  combination, 
in  three  cases,  of  Canaanites  and  Perizzites  alone  (Gen.  xiii.  7; 
xxxiv.  30;  Jud.  i.  4  f.).  It  is  further  contended  by  Meyer  and 
Wellhausen,  as  a  consequence  of  the  above  conclusion,  that 
"  Amorite  "  (E)  is  a  term  peculiar  to  the  Northern  Kingdom. 
In  support  of  this  is  cited  the  fact  that  Amos  (ii.  9)  uses  the 
term  Amorite.  But  the  usage  of  Amos  would  prove  the  con- 
trary if  it  proved  anything,  since  he  was  of  Judaic  birth, 
educati6n,  and  permanent  residence,  and  it  can  hardly  be  sup- 


408  APPENDIX  NOTE  4 

posed  that  to  be  intelligible  to  his  northern  constituency  of 
unwilling  hearers  he  needed  to  use  the  terminology  of  their 
ethnographical  school  as  against  that  of  his  own! 


NOTE   5   (§  201) 

AEAM^ANS    AND    LATER    HETTITES    IN   SYRIA 

IT  is  usually  believed  (of.  Ewald,  Hist,  of  Israel,  Eng.  tr.,  ii, 
302)  that  the  Aramaeans  had  not  only  formed  their  settlements 
in  Southern  Syria  before  the  Israelitish  occupation  of  Canaan, 
but  that  they  had  also  planted  colonies  in  Canaan  itself.  The 
name  of  a  locality,  Hadad-Riminon  (Zech.  xii.  11),  in  the  plain 
of  Megiddo,  is  referred  to  as  proof  of  this,  the  word  being 
wholly  Aramaean.  But  it  occurs  only  once,  and  that  in  a  very 
late  author,  while  the  facts  about  the  naming  of  the  place  are 
wholly  unknown.  It  is,  indeed,  conceivable  that,  in  the  times 
of  Benhadad  II,  or  Hazael,  a  trading-station  was  established- 
in  this  rich  exporting  region  (cf .  1  K.  xx.  34),  and  then  held 
as  a  Syrian  town  during  the  predominance  of  Damascus.  We 
have,  I  think,  a  confirmation  of  the  view  that  the  Aramaic 
settlements  in  Syria  were  formed  not  very  long  before  the 
eleventh  century  B.C.,  in  the  fact  that  the  bond  between  them 
and  their  kindred  beyond  the  River  was  so  close  in  the  time  of 
David  (2  Sam.  viii.  3,  explained  by  x.  16).  No  Semitic  states, 
even  when  bound  by  kinship,  remained  long  in  disinterested 
federation  (§  54).  A  parallel  is  furnished  by  the  Hettite 
confederation  (§  163 ;  cf .  157),  if  it  may  so  be  called.  On  the 
Assyrian  limitations  of  the  Aramaean  settlements  westward,  see 
Par.  257  f.  It  must  not,  however,  be  inferred  from  the  testi- 
mony of  the  cuneiform  records  that  Aramaeans  were  not  to  be 
found  west  of  the  Euphrates  until  a  comparatively  late  date. 
In  the  text  I  have  purposely  restricted  the  later  occupation  to 
permanent  settlements,  such  as  those  of  Hamath  and  Damascus. 

As  to  the  later  usage  of  the  term  "Hettites"  in  the  Old 
Testament,  it  cannot  be  too  distinctly  affirmed  that  there  were 
no  independent  Hettite  communities  in  Southern  and  Central 
Syria  from  the  time  of  David  onward.  The  popular  works 
written  about  this  people  are  here  entirely  misleading.  In 


NOTE  6  APPENDIX  409 

Jud.  i.  26,  the  word  has  exactly  the  same  general  application 
as  the  Assyrian  usage  referred  to  in  the  text.  In  2  K.  vii.  6 
(cf .  §  236)  the  historical  conditions  make  it  perfectly  clear  that 
it  could  only  have  been  the  Hettites  of  the  north  who  are 
meant.  Besides,  there  is  a  suspicious  combination  with 
Dn~ll££  here,  which  may  perhaps  confirm  the  whole  matter 
beyond  a  doubt.  In  1  K.  x.  28  D"HiC!3  is  associated  with  the 
land  of  Kue  (see  §  230),  and  in  v.  29  it  is  apparently  included 
among  the  Hettite  communities.  Hommel  (GBA.  p.  610,  n.  3) 
has  suggested  that  the  word  be  here  read  Musrlm  and  not 
referred  to  the  Egyptians  at  all,  but  to  the  Musre,  who  are 
frequently  alluded  to  in  the  inscriptions  as  living  in  a  country 
near  the  borders  of  North  Syria  and  Cappadocia  (see  esp. 
KGF.  p.  254  ff.).  In  the  extract  from  Shalmaneser  II,  given 
in  §  228,  this  country  is  named  next  to  Kue.  The  coincidence 
with  the  Biblical  passage  is  certainly  remarkable.  But  in 
2  K.  vii.  6  the  combination  of  Hettites  and  D'HitlO  occurs  again. 
Now  the  Hettites  had  no  association  with  the  Egyptians  in  the 
minds  of  the  Hebrews,  and  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  the 
Syrians  before  Samaria  could  expect  a  simultaneous  attack 
from  armies  of  these  widely  separated  peoples.  The  north,  on 
the  other  hand,  was  always  the  place  whence  sudden  over- 
whelming invasions  came  upon  Syria  and  Palestine.  The 
Hettites  here  would  thence  have  come  undoubtedly  from 
Northern  Syria  or  beyond,  along  with  their  natural  neighbours 
and  allies,  and  presumable  kindred.  The  remaining  passage, 
2  Sam.  xxiv.  6  (Sept.  "the  Hettites  of  Kadesh"),  is  a  reminis- 
cence of  the  people  who  once  gave  importance  to  the  famous 
stronghold  on  the  Orontes.  With  reference  to  the  Musre,  I 
would  add  that  the  Mio-paios  of  the  Greek  inscription  men- 
tioned by  Sachau  in  his  article  "Bemerkungen  zu  cilicischen 
Eigennamen"  (ZA.  VII.  100),  refers  to  them  and  not  to  the 
Egyptians,  as  the  author  supposes. 

NOTE  6   (§  216) 

BASIS    OF    CHRONOLOGY 

IT  is  well  known  that  the  chronology  of  the  kingdom  of 
Israel,  from  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II  to  the  taking  of  Samaria, 


410  APPENDIX  NOTE  6 

as  inferred  from  the  numbers  found  in  the  current  text  of  the 
Bible,  is  in  a  very  uncertain  state,  and  that  various  expedients 
have  been  resorted  to  in  order  to  make  it  agree  with  the 
chronology  of  the  kings  of  Judah.  This  is  not  the  place  for 
a  minute  comparison  with  the  chronological  data  of  the 
Assyrians,  but  it  may  be  remarked  in  general  that  the  system 
of  the  latter  is  more  special  and  precise.  It  was  not  the 
custom  of  the  Bible  writers,  especially  the  earlier  ones,  to 
record  events  with  a  strict  notation  of  the  time  of  their  occur- 
rence. Among  the  Assyrians  there  were  three  great  classes 
of  public  records,  in  which  every  occurrence  was  carefully 
dated:  first,  the  so-called  Eponym  lists,  to  be  presently 
described;  second,  records  of  the  events  of  each  reign,  written 
in  chronological  order;  and,  third,  business  documents,  regu- 
larly dated.  Again,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  numbers  of  the 
current  Hebrew  text  have  sometimes  proved  to  be  mutually 
inconsistent.  Accepting  these  facts  as  established  without 
further  discussion,  it  is  an  inestimable  advantage  that  we  have 
a  means  of  checking  and  supplementing  these  confessedly 
inadequate  data,  in  the  indications  furnished  for  many  leading 
events  in  the  cuneiform  records.  According  to  the  Assyrian 
system,  each  year  was  indicated  by  the  name  of  its  eponym 
(llmu  =  archon,  magistrate),  and  lists  of  these  were  carefully 
made  and  kept,  of  which  large  fragments  have  been  preserved. 
We  can  thus  make  up  a  complete  series  for  the  time  893-666 
B.C.,  as  well  as  for  shorter  periods  before  and  after.  Some 
copies  contain  also  statements  of  the  most  important  events  in 
the  respective  years,  and  note  the  changes  in  the  succession  of 
kings.  These  eponyms  are  referred  to  in  the  royal  annals 
very  frequently,  and  in  business  documents  regularly.  Their 
accuracy  is  now  beyond  question,  as  every  check  applied  to 
them  has  been  satisfactorily  met.  The  chief  corroborative 
system  is  the  famous  Canon  of  Ptolemy,  which  gives  a  list  of 
the  native  kings  of  Babylonia,  beginning  with  Nabonassar,  747 
B.C.  The  most  striking  evidence  of  the  correctness  of  the 
Assyrian  lists  is  the  statement  for  the  eponymic  year  which 
would  correspond  to  763  B.C.,  that  in  the  month  Sivan 
(=  June)  of  that  year  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  was  observed  in 
Nineveh,  which  modern  calculations  have  proved  to  have  been 


NOTE  7  APPENDIX  411 

that  of  June  15,  763  B.C.  This  eclipse  occurred  in.  the  middle 
of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II,  and  furnishes  the  surest  basis  of 
Assyrian  chronology  (cf.  §  265). 

With  reference  to  the  later  Old  Testament  usage,  it  should 
be  observed  that  notations  were  made  of  certain  classes  of 
occurrences.  Thus,  the  relative  accession  years  of  the  kings 
of  Judah  and  Israel,  from  the  Schism  downwards,  were  indi- 
cated; also  other  important  events,  such  as  the  taking  of 
Samaria  (2  K.  xvii.  6;  xviii.  9),  the  invasion  of  Sinacherib 
(2  K.  xviii.  13),  various  incidents  connected  with  the  siege 
and  capture  of  Jerusalem  (2  Kings  and  Jeremiah).  The 
Prophets,  also,  noted  frequently  in  what  years  of  their  min- 
istry, or  of  the  reigning  kings,  they  received  their  revelations 
or  commissions.  But  none  of  these  items  refer  to  a  regular 
established  system  of  dating,  such  as  that  which  the  Babyloni- 
ans and  Assyrians  employed  from  very  remote  times. 


NOTE  7    (§  249) 

SEMIKAMIS 

THE  fame  of  "  Semiramis  "  may  justify  an  additional  remark. 
Tiele  (BAG.  p.  212  f.)  and  Hommel  (GAB.  p.  631)  regard 
her  as  having  been  the  mother  of  Ilamman-nirari,  while  both 
agree  that  she  was,  in  all  probability,  a  Babylonian  princess. 
That  she  was,  in  reality,  his  wife,  appears  to  me  to  be  clear, 
from  the  fact  that  the  statue  of  Nebo  was  not  dedicated  till  the 
fifteenth  year  of  the  king's  reign,  and  that  the  new  cult  must 
have  been  introduced  much  earlier  if  she  had  been  his  mother 
and  had  ruled  the  country  as  regent  till  he  came  to  his 
majority.  It  is  the  governor  of  Kalach  who  dedicates  the 
statue,  and  he  makes  a  proclamation  in  the  last  line  of  the 
inscription  which  is  apparently  an  inauguration  of  the  worship 
of  Xebo.  This  function  was  performed  in  798  B.C.,  according 
to  the  Eponym  list,  when  the  king  must  have  been,  in  any 
case,  actual  ruler  for  several  years.  Finally,  the  hostile  rela- 
tions with  Babylonia,  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  are 
unfavourable  to  the  supposition  that  his  mother  was  a  Baby- 
lonian princess.  The  translation  of  the  inscription  is  as  fol- 


412  APPENDIX  NOTE  7 

lows:  "To  Nebo,  the  exalted  protector,  the  son  of  Bit-elu 
(§  112),  the  wide-eyed,  the  strenuous,  the  great,  the  powerful, 
the  son  of  Ea,  whose  command  is  supreme,  the  master  of  the 
arts,  who  observes  all  that  is  in  heaven  and  earth,  the  all- 
knowing  one,  the  widely  hearing,  the  wielder  of  the  writer's 
reed,  the  possessor  of  ...  the  gracious,  the  majestic,  with l 
whom  are  knowledge  and  divination,  the  beloved  of  Bel,  the 
lord  of  lords,  whose  might  is  unrivalled,  without  whom  no 
counsel  is  taken  in  heaven,  the  gracious  one,  to  whom  it  is 
good  to  make  resort,  who  dwells  in  Bit-kenu  (§  112)  which  is 
in  Kalach  —  to  the  great  lord  his  lord,  for  the  weal  of 
Eamman-niraii  the  king  of  Assyria  his  lord,  and  the  weal  of 
Sammuramat,  the  lady  of  the  palace  his  mistress,  hath  Bel- 
tarsi-iluma,  the  governor  of  the  provinces  of  Kalach,  Chamedi, 
Sirgana,  Temeni,  Yaluna,  for  the  sparing  of  his  own  life,  for 
the  length  of  his  days,  and  the  ...  of  his  years,  the  peace  of 
his  household  and  his  kindred,  and  for  freedom  from  sickness 
(this  statue)  made  and  dedicated.  0  man  of  the  future!  in 
Nebo  trust  thou,  in  any  other  god  do  not  trust ! " 


NOTE   8   (§  280) 

PUL    AND    TIGLATHPILESER 

THAT  Pul  and  Tiglathpileser  III  were  the  same  person  is 
now  universally  acknowledged.  The  question  was  first  fully 
threshed  out  by  Schrader,  KGF.  p.  422  ff.,  and  KAT.2  p. 
227  ff.  It  may  be  of  interest  to  the  Biblical  student  to  learn 
the  principal  evidences  of  identity,  which  are  as  follows :  (1)  No 
king  of  Assyria  is  mentioned  in  the  Assyrian  state  records  by 
the  name  Pul,  though  the  list  of  kings  is  complete  for  this 
whole  period;  hence  the  ruler  mentioned  in  2  K.  xv.  19  must 
be  identified  with  one  of  the  monarchs  called  by  another  name 
in  the  Assyrian  annals.  (2)  At  the  date  of  the  occurrence 
related  in  2  K.  xv.  19.  Tiglathpileser  was  king  of  Assyria,  and 
there  is  no  record  of  any  rival  pretender  to  the  throne,  who 
might  be  identified  with  Pul,  or  who  could  take  the  field  and 

1  Cf.  the  Old  Testament  synonym  for  familiar  knowledge,  Ps.  1. 11,  and 
often. 


NOTE  9  APPENDIX  413 

march  to  the  West  at  the  head  of  an  army.  (3)  Tiglathpileser 
was  actually  king  of  Babylon  at  the  time  of  the  reign  of  the 
king  whose  name  is  recorded  variously  as  Pulu,  Phulu,  and 
Poros.  If  this  designation  stood  for  another  than  Tiglath- 
pileser, the  lists  would  be  false  or  defective.  Yet,  in  the 
Babylonian  Chronicle,  not  only  does  Tiglathpileser  take  the 
place  of  Pulu  in  the  list  of  kings,  but  his  successor  is  given  in 
the  same  document  as  Shalmaneser,  the  son  and  follower  of 
Tiglathpileser.  It  is  also  a  noteworthy  illustration  of  the 
duality  of  names,  that  the  same  successor  is  called  in  the 
Babylonian  king-list  Ululai  (Elulaeus).  It  seems  as  though 
it  were  not  an  unusual  thing  for  kings,  at  their  accession,  to 
take  the  name  of  some  distinguished  predecessor  as  their 
official  designation.  See  §  251  for  an  apparent  parallel  in 
Damascus. 

NOTE  9  (§  307) 

TIGLATHPILESER    III  AND    AZARIAH    OF    JUDAH 

THE  identification  of  Azriya'u  of  Tiglathpileser's  annals 
with  Azariah  of  Judah  has  not  been  always  unquestioned. 
The  objections  of  Von  Gutschmid  (Ne^(e  Beitrage  zur  Kunde  des 
Alten  Orients,  p.  55  ff.),  which  were  fully  dealt  with  by  Schrader 
in  KGF.  p.  395-421,  of  Wellhausen  (Jahrbiicher  fur  deutsche 
Theologie,  xx.  632),  and  Klostermann  (Samuel- Konige,  p.  496), 
dealing  as  they  did  with  the  more  obvious  difficulties,  have  not 
given  occasion  for  serious  doubt.  More  weighty  is  the  posi- 
tion taken  by  Winckler  (Altorientalische  Forschungen,  I,  1893, 
p.  1-23),  who  identifies  the  "  Ya-u-di "  of  Tiglathpileser  with 
the  region  "HiT,  which  occurs  in  the  inscriptions  recently  found 
at  Sinjirli  in  Northern  Syria,  and  which  he  proves  to  have 
formed  part  of  the  older  kingdom  of  "Patin"  (Chattin).  His 
main  plea  is  that,  inasmuch  as  the  references  to  Azriya'u  occur 
only  in  connection  with  Tiglathpileser's  operations  in  Northern 
Syria,  it  is  necessary  to  look  for  the  home  of  that  personage  in 
that  region;  and  that  it  was  only  the  universal  ignorance  of 
the  existence  of  a  country  "  Ya-u-di "  in  the  right  locality  that 
led  scholars  to  identify  it  with  Judah.  Among  other  argu- 
ments, he  adduces  the  fact  that  the  Azriya'u  in  question  is 


414  APPENDIX  NOTE  9 

represented  as  taking  the  field  in  person,  which  it  was  impos- 
sible for  Azariah  of  Judah,  at  his  advanced  age,  and  with 
Jotham  as  the  regent,  to  have  done  in  738,  if  indeed  he  was 
alive  at  that  date ; l  further,  that  there  was  no  occasion  of 
Azariah  of  Judah  interfering  with  Tiglathpileser  at  this  stage, 
since  the  latter  did  not  come  below  Northern  Syria  in  that 
year;  moreover,  that  the  kingdom  of  Judah  was  not  in  a  posi- 
tion, under  Uzziah,  to  undertake  such  an  expedition  as  the 
current  hypothesis  involves. 

It  must  be  confessed  that,  at  first  sight,  it  seems  a  bold 
thing  to  conceive  of  the  intervention  of  Judah  in  the  manner 
and  place  supposed,  and  if  a  king  Azriya'u  and  a  country 
Ya'udu  or  "Yaudi"  can  be  found  in  Northern  or  Middle 
Syria  at  this  era,  they  must  be  accepted  as  fulfilling  the  his- 
torical conditions.  But,  unfortunately  for  Winckler's  theory, 
they  have  not  as  yet  been  brought  to  light.  Xo  Azriya'u 
( =  Azariah)  has  so  far  been  unearthed  in  those  parts ;  and  to 
claim  that  Ya'udu,  or  "  Yaudi "  is  the  same  as  "HfcT 2  (which 
Sachau  impartially  transcribes  Ya'di),  is  to  assume  too  much, 
however  plausible  the  combination  may  be.  At  best  this 
"HJC  was  a  petty  state,  a  fragment  of  a  kingdom,  itself  never 
very  important,  and  it  is  hardly  conceivable  that  "nineteen 
districts  belonging  to  Hamath,"  some  of  which  were  of  con- 
siderable significance,  looked  to  it  for  protection.  On  the 
other  hand,  we  have  the  name  Azariah  and  the  name  Judah 
written  precisely  as  one  would  expect  them  to  appear  in  an 
Assyrian  document,  while  King  Azariah  is  known  to  have  been 
living  and  reigning  over  Judah  at  least  till  within  a  very  few 
years  of  the  date  in  question.  That  he  was,  moreover,  in  a 
position  to  take  just  such  action  as  is  indicated  in  the  cunei- 
form record,  has  been  sufficiently  demonstrated  in  the  text  of 

1  Little  weight  need  be  attached  to  this  consideration.  We  need  not 
suppose  that  Azriya'u  (whoever  he  was)  took  the  field  in  person  at  all. 
Oriental  kin.irs  universally  upheld  for  themselves  the  principle,  qui  facit 
per  alium  facit  per  se. 

'2  Stress  is  laid  upon  the  ending  i  in  Ya-u-di,  as  agreeing  with  the  form 
in  the  Sinjirli  inscription  ;  but  that  is,  apparently,  a  genitive  termination, 
and  the  ending  is,  in  any  case,  of  so  little  consequence  that  in  the  previous 
line  the  adjectival  form  is  written  Ya-u-da-d. 


NOTE  10  APPENDIX  415 

the  present  work.  That  Hamath,  which  was,  after  all,  the 
state  chiefly  concerned,  was  closely  related  to  both  Israel  and 
Judah,  is  clear  from  2  K.  xiv.  28,  whatever  may  be  the  true 
restoration  of  the  text  (cf .  LXX),  and  besides  from  the  signifi- 
cant fact  that  a  prince  of  Hamath  in  720  bore  the  significant 
name  of  Ya'u-bi'di,  an  appellation  which  of  course  does  not 
necessarily  imply  that  Jehovah  was  the  object  of  a  worship 
indigenous  in  Hamath,  but  only  that  the  cult  had  been  accepted 
there  along  with  the  protectorate  or  yoke  of  Israel  or  Judah.1 

On  the  whole,  in  spite  of  Winckler's  very  ingenious  con- 
structions, it  seems  best  to  adhere  in  the  meantime  to  the 
generally  accepted  opinion. 


NOTE     10   (§  314) 
I 

"KIXG  YABEB" 

THE  word  S"|P,  Yareb,  would  be  naturally  explained  in 
Hos.  v.  13  as  a  proper  name,  but  we  know  of  no  Assyrian 
monarch  with  a  name  at  all  similar.  It  is  better,  then,  to 
take  the  word  as  an  appellative,  though  even  so  it  is  not  easy 
to  settle  the  meaning.  To  explain  it  as  a  descriptive  imperfect 
of  y~\,  "to  contend,  quarrel, "  would  give  a  tolerable  though 
not  the  best  sense :  it  was  the  settled  policy  of  others  than  the 
Assyrian  rulers  to  pick  quarrels.  But  the  vowel  pointing  of 
the  word,  as  well  as  the  rareness  of  the  construction  outside  of 
poetry,  stand  in  the  way  of  this  explanation.  The  best  sense 
of  all  is,  I  think,  to  be  gained  by  explaining  the  word  as 
a  participial  adjective  of  a  familiar  Aramaic  stem,  meaning 
"to  be  great."  Aramaic  being  now  the  ordinary  medium  of 
international  intercourse,  it  was  natural  that  that  language 
should  furnish  the  designation  of  the  "  Great  King  "  that  was 

1  Winckler  (7.e.  p.  16)  endeavours  to  use  this  name  of  a  Hamathaean 
prince  as  an  argument  in  favour  of  the  legitimate  occurrence  of  Ycfu  in 
Azriya'u  as  the  name  of  a  North-Syrian  ruler.  But  what  evidence  have 
•we  of  close  relations  between  Israel  and  Northern  Syria  ?  By  the  way, 
when  Winckler  (p.  3,  21),  makes  out  "  Patin  "  to  have  been  the  Biblical 
Paddan-Aram,  he  forgets  that  Gen.  xxxi.  21  tells  us  expressly  that  the 
latter  district  lay  on  the  east  of  the  Euphrates. 


416  APPENDIX  NOTE  10 

current  in  Western  Asia.  It  is  unnecessary  to  add  that  this 
was  the  favourite  title  assumed  by  the  Assyrian  monarchs 
themselves. 

Sayce  (Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  i,  162  ff. ;  Babylonian  and 
Oriental  Record,  ii,  18  ff.)  holds  that  S*"P  was  the  original  name 
of  Sargon,  in  whose  reign  he  thinks  the  latter  portion  of  the 
Book  of  Hosea  was  composed.  This  theory,  though  regarded  as 
"  proved "  by  Neubauer  (ZA.  Ill,  103),  and  looked  upon  with 
favour  by  Hommel  (GBA.  680),  is  disproved  by  two  fatal  objec- 
tions. The  Hebrews  would,  of  course,  write  an  Assyrian  name 
according  to  the  impression  it  made  upon  the  ear  (hence,  for  ex- 
ample, s  instead  of  3,  in  such  proper  names  as  Sargon,  Asnappar). 
But  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  neither  wrote  nor  pro- 
nounced y  at  the  beginning  of  any  native  word,  and  the  Hebrew 
equivalent  would  have  begun  Avith  X.  Again,  the  composition 
of  such  a  work  as  that  of  Hosea  during  the  reign  of  Sargon 
was  impossible.  When  Sargon  came  to  the  throne,  Samaria 
was  just  on  the  point  of  surrender  (§  357  f . ),  the  whole  work  of 
reduction  having  been  already  accomplished  by  Shalmaneser  IV. 
At  his  accession,  the  negotiations  with  Egypt,  referred  to  by 
Hosea,  were  long  past.  Nor  could  Sargon  have  been  referred  to 
by  the  Prophet  as  an  heir  apparent  or  rising  general,  for  the 
personage  in  question  is  expressly  designated  as  the  reigning 
monarch. 

NOTE   11    (§  315) 

DATE    OF    ZECH.    IX. -XI. 

IT  seems  impossible  to  find  any  other  period  in  the  history  of 
the  Western  country,  when  all  the  conditions  offered  in  these 
three  chapters  were  fulfilled.  Where  otherwise,  for  example, 
was  it  possible  to  couple  Hadrach  (see  §  258,  307),  whose  fate 
is  commemorated  by  Tiglathpileser  alone,  with  Gaza,  which 
likewise  was  the  victim  of  his  vengeance?  When  again,  con- 
temporaneously, or  nearly  so,  with  these  events,  was  Gilead 
overrun  by  foreign  troops  and  lost  to  Israel?  The  reference 
to  the  lonians  (ix.  13)  in  this  age  is  not  surprising,  when 
Hosea  (xi.  10)  makes  a  not  obscure  allusion  to  the  captives 
who  had  been  transported  beyond  the  western  seas,  not  to 


NOTE  12  APPENDIX  417 

mention  Joel  (iv.  4-6),  of  disputed  date,  who  refers  to  similar 
conditions.  That  the  Northern  Kingdom  was  still  in  exist- 
ence, and  Assyria  still  in  its  "  pride  "  (x.  10  f.),  is  intimated  as 
plainly  as  anything  else  in  Prophecy. 


NOTE  12   (§  327) 
THE  SIGN  "IMMAXUEL" 

IT  is  with  the  utmost  diffidence  that,  at  this  advanced  stage 
of  inquiry,  I  offer  an  observation  upon  the  meaning  of  this  much- 
explained  passage.  The  first  point  that  naturally  comes  up  is 
the  question  of  the  parentage  of  the  original  "  sign  "  and  type. 
From  the  point  of  view  of  language  and  grammar,  the  tenable 
opinions  are  reducible  to  two:  the  article  before  flftS^  either 
points  out  the  particular  young  woman  of  the  time  who  was  to 
become  the  mother  of  Immanuel,  or  it  simply  designates  some 
one  of  a  class,  not  further  to  be  defined  or  to  be  understood  as 
definitely  meant;  that  is,  some  young  woman  soon  to  become 
a  mother  would  bear  a  child  to  be  named  "God  is  with  us." 
The  latter  view  is  quite  tenable  according  to  Hebrew  usage 
(cf.  especially  Gen.  xiv.  13;  xviii.  7;  Num.  xi.  27;  1  Sam. 
xvii.  34;  2  Sam.  xv.  13;  xvii.  17;  IK.  xx.  36).  The  ques- 
tion is,  does  the  context  favour  it?  It  is  hard  to  think  so, 
because  the  indefiniteness  of  the  parent  would  involve  the 
indefiniteness  of  the  child  also,  and  if  he  could  not  be  identified 
in  his  childhood  the  prediction  would  lose  all  its  significance-, 
in  other  words,  the  sign  could  not  be  verified.  It  is  self- 
evident  that  the  name  of  the  child  is  mentioned  not  merely  on 
account  of  its  signification,  but  also  for  the  purposes  of  later 
identification.  The  mother  is  at  least  defined  in  so  far  as  she 
was  to  bear  the  promised  child.  But  we  must  conclude  from 
Micah  v.  3-5,  and  especially  from  the  utterances  as  to  a  child 
ruler  and  deliverer  made  by  Isaiah  himself  (chs.  ix.,  xi.)  that 
a  Saviour  was  to  appear  for  Israel,  and  to  be  born  of  the 
royal  house  of  David  (ch.  xi.  1).  If  "  Immanuel "  answers  at  all 
to  such  a  child,  his  mother  would  belong  to  that  house,  and 
may  be  presumed  to  have  been  the  wife  of  one  of  the  princes. 
Naturally,  we  think  of  the  wife  of  Ahaz,  because  the  deliverer 

2  E 


418  APPENDIX  NOTE  12 

was  to  be  the  ruler  of  the  country  (ch.  ix.  6  f.),  and  no  one 
would  have  dreamed  of  a  dethronement  of  the  legitimate  heir 
in  Judah,  least  of  all  the  conservative  Prophet.  Is  there  any 
evidence  of  this  in  the  context?  Just  one  expression,  what- 
ever it  may  amount  to,  the  word  nx*")p  which  nearly  all  the 
interpreters  translate  "she  shall  call,"  but  which  the  LXX 
renders  much  more  naturally,  "thou  shalt  call."  Why  the 
latter  explanation  of  the  word  has  been  so  generally  ignored,  I 
do  not  know.  There  is  as  much  reason  for  translating  the 
same  consonants  by  the  third  feminine  in  Gen.  xvii.  19,  a 
passage  precisely  analogous  to  our  own,  where  all  authorities 
agree  in  holding  the  second  masculine  to  have  been  meant. 
If  it  was  so  obvious  in  the  passage  in  Genesis  that  this  was  the 
meaning,  why  should  the  writer  in  our  passage  have  chosen 
precisely  the  same  form  if  he  intended  the  third  feminine, 
especially  when  the  archaic  form,  with  the  ending  fl,  is  very 
rarely  used  for  this  person?  Such  ambiguity,  when  the 
chances  were  in  favour  of  a  misunderstanding,  on  account  of 
the  form  being  the  regular  one  for  the  second  person,  is 
unthinkable.  It  could  only  have  been  done  if  it  had  been 
clear  that  the  speaker  was  not  addressing  Ahaz.  But  it 
appears  plainly  from  v.  17  that,  in  the  particular  application 
of  the  prediction,  Ahaz  was  singled  out  as  the  head  and 
representative  of  the  "house  of  David,"  which  was  formally 
arraigned  at  the  opening  of  the  discourse.  It  seems  altogether 
probable,  then,  that  Ahaz  was  addressed  as  the  namer  and 
father  of  the  coming  child.  In  harmony  with  ch.  ix.,  it  is 
further  to  be  assumed  that  it  was  the  heir  to  the  throne  that 
was  heralded  as  the  future  deliverer,  and  this  view  is  confirmed 
by  the  use  of  the  term  nttS'S?,  which  would  naturally  be  applied 
to  a  young  wife,  especially  to  one  who  had  not  as  yet  borne 
children.  We  are  pointed  then,  it  would  seem,  for  the  primary 
reference,  to  Hezekiah,  presumably  the  eldest  son  of  Ahaz. 

But  can  the  chronology  be  made  to  suit  this  interpretation? 
Xot  according  to  the  common  view  of  the  date  of  Hezekiah's 
birth.  Cheyne,  for  example,  says  (note  in  Commentary  to  ch. 
vii.  14):  "The  theory  that  Immanuel  =  Hezekiah  was  long 
ago  disproved  by  the  remark  of  Jerome,  that  Hezekiah  must 
have  been  at  least  nine  years  old  when  the  prophecy  was 


NOTE  12  APPENDIX  419 

delivered  (comp.  2  K.  xvi.  2;  xviii.  2)."  The  former  of  these 
passages  cited  tells  us  that  Ahaz  was  twenty  years  old  when  he 
began  to  reign,  and  that  he  reigned  sixteen  years.  Assuming 
this  notation  to  be  correct,  how  old  would  Ahaz  have  been  at 
the  birth  of  Hezekiah,  if  the  latter  were  nine  years  of  age  in 
735?  As  we  have  seen  (§  269),  Ahaz  could  not  have  begun  his 
reign  before  736,  and  if  Hezekiah  was  then  eight  years  old 
the  father  could  not  have  been  older  than  twelve  at  the  birth 
of  the  son!  The  other  passage  tells  us  that  Hezekiah  was 
twenty-five  when  he  began  his  reign.  If  the  statement  about 
Ahaz  is  correct,  then  he  would  still  have  been  only  eleven  or 
twelve  at  the  birth  of  Hezekiah.  But  it  is  evident  on  all 
grounds,  that  the  age  of  Hezekiah  at  his  accession  must  be 
shortened  considerably  from  twenty-five.  Even  if  he  came  to 
the  throne  in  715  or  714,  his  age  must  still  be  less  than 
twenty-five  to  make  it  agree  with  ch.  xvi.  2.  If  we  take  off 
five  or  six  years  we  would  make  his  birth-year  734  or  733, 
which  would  suit  the  terms  of  the  prophecy  before  us,  and 
would  also  make  Ahaz  to  have  been  twenty -two  or  twenty -three 
at  the  date  of  his  birth.  I  am  now  only  concerned  to  prove 
that  the  correction  which  has  to  be  made  in  one  or  the  other  of 
the  numerical  statements  in  Kings  makes  it  not  impossible 
that,  as  far  as  date  is  concerned,  Hezekiah  is  not  excluded  as 
the  primary  child  of  the  prophecy.  Finally,  if  it  be  said  that, 
historically,  Hezekiah  did  not  fulfil  the  predictions,  it  is  to  be 
replied  that  he  did  so  more  than  any  one  else  that  we  know  of. 
A  note  should  be  added  as  to  the  significance  of  the  name 
"Immanuel."  It  is  naturally  objected  that  Hezekiah  is  never 
elsewhere  called  by  this  name.  That  is  true,  but  we  have  also 
to  account  for  the  remarkable  phenomenon  that  the  name 
never  reappears  as  the  designation  of  the  expected  Messiah 
till  New-Testament  times.  This  fact  can  only  be  explained  on 
the  hypothesis  that  the  intended  application  of  the  name  in 
Old-Testament  history  was  only  temporary.  As  the  most 
expressive  of  the  names  employed  in  the  Old  Testament  to 
designate  a  God-appointed  deliverer,  it  was  applied  by  Matthew 
to  Jesus,  but  the  significance  of  the  idea  of  the  Messiah  could 
not  be  exhausted  by  any  one  name ;  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
we  find  other  appellations  immediately  applied  (ch.  ix.  5). 


420  APPENDIX  NOTE  12 

We  must  not  forget  that,  among  the  Hebrews,  naming  was  not 
putting  on  a  label,  as  it  is  with  us,  but  affixing  a  description 
or  characterization. 

It  is  even  doubtful  whether  "  Immanuel "  occurs  more  than 
once  as  a  proper  name.  In  ch.  viii.  8,  we  have  only  Jewish 
tradition,  which  is  notoriously  unsafe  in  Messianic  passages, 
in  favour  of  such  a  rendering.  Is  it  not  much  more  in  har- 
mony with  the  context  to  begin  a  new  section  with  the  phrase, 
"God  is  with  us,"  so  that  its  later  (and  last)  occurrence,  v.  10, 
is  a  rhetorical  reaffirmation  of  the  promise  of  divine  succour? 
The  preceding  words  "in  thy  land"  would  then  have  been 
addressed  to  the  Prophet  himself,  as,  in  fact,  we  would  expect 
them  to  have  been,  from  the  direct  statement  of  v.  5.  The 
new  paragraph  would  accordingly  begin  thus :  "  God  is  with 
us!  Know  it  [Sept.]  all  ye  peoples!  Know  it,  and  give  ear 
all  ye  of  far  countries, "  etc. 


NOTE   13    (§  331  f.) 

TIGLATHPILESEB    III    IN    PALESTINE 

THE  principal  sources  for  this  expedition  are  III  R.  10  Nr.  2, 
(annalistic),  and  II  R.  67,  53-63  (synoptical).  These  are  very 
seriously  mutilated,  but  what  remains  is  of  the  greatest 
importance,  as  the  names  cited  in  the  text  at  once  indicate. 
Besides  these  are  certain  small  fragments  published  by  Layard, 
Inscr.  PI.  29,  66,  72  f. 

The  principal  dates  are  fixed  by  the  notices  of  the  Eponym 
lists,  which  run  as  follows:  735,  to  the  land  of  Ararat; 
734,  to  the  land  of  Philistia;  733,  to  the  land  of  Damascus; 
732,  to  the  land  of  Damascus. 

The  order  of  events  followed  in  the  text  is  determined  by 
III  R.  10,  Nr.  2,  along  with  Lay.  66.  I  give  a  translation  of 
the  passage  in  the  annalistic  inscription  (III  R.  10,  Nr.  2), 
which  narrates  the  first  stage  of  the  operations.  In  line  17  I 
use  an  important  correction  of  Rost  ("they  overthrew"). 

"(6)  The  city  Gal — ,  the  city  Abil-akka  which  lay  at  the 
entrance  to  the  country  of  Omri,  (7)  the  wide  [land  of  Naphta]li 
throughout  its  extent,  I  annexed  to  the  bounds  of  Assyria. 


NOTE  13  APPENDIX  421 

(8)  My  military  and  civil  officers  I  placed  over  them.  Chanun 
of  the  city  of  Gaza  (9)  took  flight  before  my  weapons  of  war 
and  fled  to  the  land  of  Egypt.  The  city  of  Gaza  (10)  I  took ; 
his  possessions  and  his  gods  [I  carried  off  as  spoil,]  and  the 
image  of  my  sovereignty  (11)  I  erected  in  his  palace.  Among 
the  gods  of  their  land  I  reckoned  (12).  .  .  Tribute  I  laid  on 
them  .  .  .  and  like  a  bird  (13)  [in  fear  he  left  his  hiding-place 
and  gave  himself  up  (?)].  To  his  place  I  restored  him.  (14) 
Gold,  silver,  variegated  garments,  Kitu  cloth  (15)  .  .  .  many 
...  I  received. 

The  land  of  Omri  (16)  [I  conquered;  its  fighting  men  I]  slew; 
officers  [over  it  I  appointed,  ]  the  mass  of  its  people  (17)  I  took 
prisoner  and  deported  to  Assyria.  Pekah  their  king  they  over- 
threw, and  Hosea  (18)  to  kingship  over  them  I  installed.  Ten 
talents  of  gold  and  .  .  .  talents  of  silver  as  their  contribution  I 
received  from  them  and  carried  it  away  to  Assyria." 

Lines  6-8.  Ga-al  can  hardly  be  supplemented  to  "Gilead," 
for  reasons  to  be  presently  adduced.  Abil-akka  (as  the  original 
seems  to  read)  may  very  well  stand  for  Abel-(beth)-Ma'aka, 
and  the  filling  out  of  -li  to  make  Naphtali,  though  a  somewhat 
venturesome  proceeding,  has  at  least  strong  geographical 
support.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  impossible  that  Ga-al 
may  represent  Galil,  or  Galilee.  The  determinative  "city" 
placed  before  it  is  sometimes  used  loosely  to  indicate  a  coun- 
try or  district,  and  the  word  may  be  intended  to  designate  the 
western  portion  of  Naphtali.  The  correspondence  with  2  K. 
xv.  29  would  then  be  close  enough.  That  we  are  not  to  look 
for  "  Gilead  "  here  is  obvious.  Tiglathpileser  defines  the  range 
of  the  conquest  in  question  by  saying  that  it  is  at  "  the  entrance 
of  the  land  of  Omri,"  which  Gilead  cannot  be  explained  to  be. 
This  district,  normally  designating  a  region  entirely  beyond 
the  range  of  this  campaign, — that  is,  the  country  east  of  Jordan 
and  south  of  Bashan, —  if  mentioned  by  Tiglathpileser  at  all, 
must  have  had  its  place  in  the  narrative  of  the  campaigns 
against  Damascus.  Moreover,  its  mention  in  the  Biblical  pas- 
sage referred  to  is  just  as  strange,  especially  when  we  find  it 
included  in  the  territory  of  Naphtali,  and  placed  in  the  list  of 
the  conquered  localities  between  Hazor  and  Galilee.  The  only 
solution  of  the  difficulty  that  seems  satisfactory  is  to  assume 


422  APPENDIX  NOTE  13 

that  the  word  was  written  by  mistake  for  the  next  word 
h*1^,  which  so  closely  resembles  it,  and  that  then,  by  another 
oversight  of  a  not  uncommon  kind,  both  were  allowed  to 
remain.  This  would  imply  that  Gilead  is  not  really  mentioned 
by  any  ultimate  extant  authority  as  among  the  acquisitions  of 
the  Assyrians  at  the  date  in  question. 

In  connection  with  the  revolution  in  Samaria  itself,  it  should 
be  remarked  that  Pekah  is  mentioned  in  another  passage,  Lay. 
66,  18.  There  it  is  said  that,  in  contrast  to  the  habitual  usage 
of  the  Great  King  with  rebellious  states,  Samaria  alone  he 
spared  the  fate  of  being  razed  to  the  ground  and  plundered. 
He  then  proceeds  to  relate  his  treatment  of  Pekah,  at  which 
point  the  fragmentary  document  breaks  off. 


NOTE  14  (§  343) 

THE    NAME    "  SEVE  " 

THIS  Seve,  which  the  Massoretes  have  ignorantly  read  So 
(KID),  is  identical  with  the  Sib'u,  turtan  or  lieutenant  (here 
=  viceroy),  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  of  whom  mention  is  made  by 
Sargon  (Khorsabad  Inscr.  1.  25).  It  has  been  generally  sup- 
posed that  he  was  also  the  same  person  as  Sabako,  the  sub- 
jugator of  Lower  Egypt.  The  principal  objection  to  this  is 
the  fact  that  the  Assyrian  scribes  represent  the  latter  name 
fully  as  Sabaku,  and  could  therefore  not  have  held  the  two  to 
have  been  identical.  Moreover,  the  Assyrians  would  have 
known  much  better  than  to  have  called  Sabako,  the  supreme 
ruler,  either  a  general  or  viceroy.  Seve  (Sib'u)  was  therefore 
apparently  one  of  the  princes  or  petty  kings  of  the  Delta,  who 
conducted  their  intrigues  with  the  approval  or,  perhaps,  at 
the  instigation  of  his  suzerain,  Sabako.  See  the  acute  remarks 
of  Winckler  (UAG.  92  ff.).  Winckler  introduces  an  element 
of  confusion  by  using  an  imaginary  reading  2e/3ex  as  repre- 
senting Seve  in  the  LXX.  Codex  B  (Seywp)  and  Lagarde's 
Lucian  ('ASpa/AeAex)  have  widely  divergent  readings,  but  Codex 
A  ( 2wa)  followed  by  the  Vulgate  (Sua)  shows,  by  comparison 
with  the  Assyrian,  absolute  agreement  with  the  Massoretic 
consonants.  Winckler  is  also  wrong  in  identifying  KID  and 


NOTE  15  APPENDIX  423 


Sib'u  with  the  Se^i^ws  of  Manetho,  who  can  only  be  Sabataka, 
the  son  and  successor  of  Sabako,  the  same  "  Pharaoh  "  who  in 
715  proffered  homage  to  Sargon,  and  in  711  entered  into  league 
with  the  Palestinians  against  him. 


NOTE   15   (§  358) 

SARGON    II    AND    HIS    MONUMENTS 

THE  Babylonian  Chronicle  runs  (i.  29  ff.) :  "In  the  fifth 
year  Shalmaneser  in  the  month  Tebet  died.  Five  years 
Shalmaneser  had  borne  rule  over  Akkad  and  Assyria.  In 
the  month  Tebet  on  the  twelfth  day  Sargon  in  Assyria  took 
his  seat  upon  the  throne.  In  Nisan,  Merodach-baladan  in 
Babylon  took  his  seat  upon  the  throne."  See  the  text  ZA. 
II,  163. 

The  name  Sargon  is  the  Massoretic  or  traditional  Jewish 
pronunciation  of  the  current  Assyrian  Sarken(u).  The  conso- 
nants, at  least,  represent  accurately  the  contemporary  Pales- 
tinian conception  of  the  sound  of  the  name  (cf .  J3D,  sagan  = 
ptT).  It  is  impossible,  however,  to  say  at  present  exactly 
how  the  name  of  the  king  was  pronounced.  All  the  modes  of 
writing  it  that  have  come  down  to  us  are  ideographic,  and  the 
g  in  the  Hebrew  word  may  confirm  the  supposition,  which  is 
in  itself  very  probable,  that  "Sargon"  is  the  same  name  as 
Sargani,  the  famous  old  king  of  Akkad  (§  89  ff.).  The  ideo- 
graphic modes  of  writing  were  intended  as  complimentary 
epithets  of  the  king,  and,  in  fact,  were  little  better  than 
solemn  puns:  Sar-ukln  means:  "The  king  set  in  order,"  and 
Sar-kenu,  "the  sure  or  legitimate  king." 

Though  great  merits  are  to  be  conceded  to  Sargon  as  a 
leader  and  ruler,  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  picture  drawn 
by  Winckler  (Sargontexte,  p.  xlv  f.)  is  somewhat  overdrawn. 
There  is  no  proof  that  he  originated  any  fruitful  ideas  of  state 
policy,  like  the  great  Tiglathpileser,  and  the  fact  that  he  had 
to  spend  almost  his  whole  reign  in  fighting  seems  to  indicate 
that  there  was  something  lacking  in  his  administration  of  the 
conquered  provinces. 

To  call  Sargon  a  usurper,  as  it  has  been  the  fashion  to  do, 


424  APPENDIX  NOTE  15 

is  to  use  a  misleading  term.  Winckler  (ST.  I,  p.  xiii),  with 
others,  cites  in  support  of  this  contention,  that  neither  Sargon 
himself,  nor  his  son  Sinacherib,  makes  mention  of  his 
ancestry,  and  maintains,  what  is  probable  enough,  that  the 
genealogy  found  in  inscriptions  of  Esarhaddon,  in  which  descent 
is  claimed  from  very  ancient  kings,  Bel-banu  and  Adasu,  other- 
wise unknown,  is  an  invention  of  the  court  historiographers. 
All  this,  however,  would  only  prove  that  Sargon  was  not  of 
the  kingly  line.  If  Shalmaneser  IV,  as  is  most  likely,  was 
childless,  he  would  be  bound  to  name  some  one  as  his  suc- 
cessor, and  he  may  very  well  have  named  a  distinguished 
young  general  like  Sargon. 

The  inscriptions  of  Sargon  are  quite  extensive.  The  prin- 
cipal of  them  contain  the  annals  of  his  reign  up  to  the 
fifteenth  year.  These  were  inscribed  on  the  walls  of  his  great 
palace  of  Khorsabad,  and  were  first  published  by  Botta  in  his 
work  Monuments  de  Ninive,  1849  f.  vol.  iv.  There  is,  besides, 
a  large  synoptical  inscription  of  his  achievements,  written  in 
the  same  fashion,  but  not  chronologically  arranged,  also  first 
published  in  the  same  work.  The  chief  cylinder  inscription 
(I  R.  36)  is  also  synoptical.  Other  inscriptions  of  less  impor- 
tance have  been  found  in  Ximrud,  in  the  ruins  of  Nineveh 
proper,  and  one  even  in  Cyprus,  on  the  site  of  the  ancient 
Kition.  All  the  extant  inscriptions  have  been  published  by 
H.  Winckler  in  his  valuable  work,  Die  Keilschrifttexte  Sargons, 
2  vols.,  Leipzig,  1889  (the  second  volume  containing  the  texts 
alone,  autographed  by  L.  Abel).  This  supersedes  all  previous 
editions  except  that  of  D.  G.  Lyon,  Keilschrifttexte  Sargons, 
Leipzig,  1883,  which  contains  the  cylinder  and  a  few  minor 
documents.  The  annals  are  much  mutilated;  the  other  impor- 
tant ones  better  preserved.  Translations  are  given  by  Winckler 
and  Lyon  in  the  works  above  mentioned,  and  by  Peiser  in 
KB.  II,  35  ff.  In  the  earlier  years  (1862  and  onward),  Oppert 
was  the  chief  labourer  in  editing  and  translating  Sargon's 
inscriptions.  He  also  contributed  the  translations  in  RP. 
VII,  IX. 


NOTE  16  APPENDIX  425 

XOTE   16   (§  360) 

INSCRIPTIONS    RELATING    TO    SAMARIA 

THE  most  general  reference  is  that  which  occurs  on  one  of 
the  doors  of  the  great  palace  of  Khorsabad  in  one  of  the 
summarizing  documents  with  which  these  doors  are  inscribed 
(see  Wiiickler,  I,  p.  x).  In  the  course  of  a  list  of  Sargon's 
achievements,  we  have  the  statement  (Winckler,  PL  38,  1. 
31  f.):  "The  conqueror  of  the  city  of  Samaria  and  the  whole 
land  of  Beth-Omri."  In  the  Cylinder  Inscription,  1. 19,  Sargon 
calls  himself  "the  subjugator  of  the  broad  land  of  Beth-Omri. " 

The  long  summarizing  inscription  011  the  walls  of  the 
Khorsabad  palace  (see  Winckler,  p.  x)  gives  the  following 
account  (lines  23-25,  Winckler,  PI.  30  f.) :  "The  city  Samaria 
I  besieged  (and)  27,290  people,  inhabiters  of  it,  I  took  away 
captive ;  50  chariots  (which  were)  in  it  I  appropriated,  but  the 
rest  (of  the  people)  I  allowed  to  retain  their  possessions.  I 
appointed  my  governor  over  them  and  the  tribute  of  the  late 
king  I  imposed  upon  them." 

The  report  in  the  Annals  is  the  fullest,  but  it  is  unfortu- 
nately mutilated.  I  give  a  translation  of  what  remains,  along 
with  the  restorations  that  seem  probable  (for  the  text  see 
Winckler,  PI.  1,  10  ff.) :  "In  the  beginning  [of  my  reign]  the 
city  Samaria  ...  [I  took]  .  .  .  with  the  help  of  Shamash,  who 
secures  victory  to  me  [.  .  .  27,290  people  inhabiters  of  it]  I  took 
away  captive ;  50  chariots  the  property  of  my  royalty  [which 
were  in  it  I  appropriated  .  .  .  The  city]  I  restored,  and  more 
than  before  I  caused  it  to  be  inhabited;  people  of  the  lands 
conquered  by  my  hand  in  it  [I  caused  to  dwell.  My  governor 
over  them  I  appointed,  and  tribute]  and  imposts,  just  as  upon 
the  Assyrians  I  laid  upon  them.''  Here  we  have  an  indication 
of  the  clemency  of  Sargon  towards  the  Samariaus  and  of  his 
desire  to  have  the  city  repeopled. 


END    OF    VOL.    I. 


504     8 


